The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the defendant alleged a mistake of facts has inflicted an injury on the victim, it is not aimed at retaliation against the victim.

B. The court below's decision on the grounds of unfair sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Article 5-9(2) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes provides for a limited term of not less than one year, which is greater than the statutory penalty under the Criminal Act, where the crime of assault, intimidation, etc. is committed under the Criminal Act for the purpose of preventing the provision of a criminal investigation team, such as a criminal complaint or accusation, the purpose of retaliation against the investigation or trial of a criminal case of the criminal case of the criminal defendant or of submitting materials, or for preventing the provision of a criminal investigation team, such as a criminal complaint or accusation, statement, testimony or submission of materials, or cancelling a false statement, testimony or submission of materials.

Here, whether an actor had such an objective ought to be reasonably determined in light of social norms by comprehensively taking into account the following factors: the offender’s age, occupation, and other personal factors; the motive and process of the offense; the means and method of the offense; the content and manner of the act; the victim’s personal relationship; and the circumstances before

(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Defendant was notified of a summary order of KRW 2 million at the Busan District Court on September 16, 2012 as follows: (a) the Defendant was notified of a summary order of KRW 2 million at the Busan District Court on January 2, 2013; (b) the Defendant was sentenced to a high fine of KRW 2 million due to the victim’s failure to reach an agreement; and (c) the Defendant was found to find the main place in which the Victim was operated by the victim one to two times a week during the period from March 14, 2013 to the police officer from March 14, 2013; and (d) the victim interfered with the bar business, which is under the jurisdiction of the Defendant.