The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the victim C, a lessor of a building leased by the Defendant on January 22, 2014, did not return the lease deposit, and the Defendant called the victim by phone to the victim, and reported the return of the deposit to the tax office that paid the monthly rent.

If so, the value-added tax that has not been paid for 8 years will be collected additionally.

“Intimidating the victim”, the victim was threatened.

2. Determination

A. In the crime of intimidation under Article 283 of the Criminal Act, the term “Intimidation” means notifying a person who has become the other party of any harm sufficient to cause fear. Whether such threat constitutes a threat of harm or injury ought to be determined by comprehensively taking into account the various circumstances before and after the act, such as the offender and the other party’s tendency, surrounding circumstances at the time of notification, relationship between the offender and the other party, and the degree of friendship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do10451, Aug. 17, 2012). Furthermore, in the crime of intimidation, the crime of intimidation, including awareness and acknowledgement of the offender’s threat of harm to the extent that the offender may cause fear to the general public, and whether there was an intent of intimidation in the above meaning, should be determined by comprehensively taking into account not only the appearance of the act, but also the circumstances leading to such act, and the relationship with the victim, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 90Do2102, May 10, 199).

1) The victim is the owner of the building D located in Jinju-si, and the defendant is the victim on March 6, 2005 and the above building 2.