The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the content and the attitude of the victim, a text message sent by the Defendant to the victim E by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles does not constitute a degree of fear or apprehension that the victim would feel, and the Defendant sent the above text message to the victim to recover equity deposits. Therefore, the Defendant’s act is not unlawful as a legitimate exercise of rights.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by authority, the prosecutor added "a person who attempted to commit an offense" to the name of the offense in question, and "Articles 352, 350 (1), and 40 of the Criminal Act" to the applicable law, and applied the following facts for the application for the modification of an indictment to change the contents of the facts charged as stated in the facts charged. This court permitted the above (the additional facts charged are related to the violation of the Act on Promotion of the Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, etc., and the initial facts charged are related to the fact of violation of the Act on Promotion of the Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, etc., and thus, it is evident that the initial indictment is effective, and it does not harm the identity of the facts charged; therefore, the judgment of the court below before the amendment of an indictment cannot be maintained any more.

However, the Defendant’s misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles as to the violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. among the facts charged in the instant case are still subject to the judgment of the court, notwithstanding the above grounds for reversal

3. Determination on the Defendant’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. According to the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the first instance court as to whether the constituent elements are met, the Defendant is the victim on April 25, 2017.