The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles, the Defendant did not repeatedly make phone calls or send text messages that arouse fears fears or apprehensions to the victim. Even if there are somewhat little contents in the Defendant’s monetary content and text messages, such contents may not be deemed as causing fears or apprehensions to the victim.

B. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a mental and physical state due to depression, etc.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, Articles 74(1)3 and 44-7(1)3 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. are punished for repeatedly reaching other persons through an information and communications network to arouse fear or apprehension. The issue of whether an act constitutes “the act of repeatedly reaching other persons” in this context should be determined by comprehensively considering the contents of the statement sent by the Defendant to the other party, the method and method of expression, the relationship between the Defendant and the other party, the circumstance of sending the words, the number of times of sending the words, the circumstances before and after, and the situation faced by the other party (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do7761, Dec. 12, 2013). In other words, the Defendant’s act of repeatedly sending the victim’s phone call or text message on nine occasions as stated in the judgment below, and the Defendant’s act of repeatedly sending the victim’s phone call or text message on five 1 to 14.15.25