The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, intimidation is sought.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the victim’s written agreement was submitted before the judgment of the court below was pronounced, and thus dismissed.

B. Decision of the court below on unreasonable sentencing: one year of imprisonment.

2. The offense of intimidation under Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act, which is judged as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 283(3) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The expression of intention not to punish may be made before the court of first instance rendered a judgment pursuant to Article 232(1) and

However, according to the records, since the victim submitted a written agreement to the court below on September 19, 2019, which was prior to the pronouncement of the judgment below after the prosecution, and expressed his/her intention not to be punished, the prosecution against intimidation among the facts charged in this case should be dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, the judgment of the court below which recognized it as excessive and convicted and rendered a single punishment by treating it as concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained and the defendant's assertion

3. If so, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and without deciding on the argument of unfair sentencing, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

[Discriminary Reasons] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by this court are the facts constituting the crime and summary of evidence, and Article 2-B of the judgment below.

Except for deletion of the "Kakao Stockholm data (Intimidation)" sent by a suspect in the summary of the evidence, it is identical to the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 347 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Reasons for sentencing Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated offenders.