The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding, misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant brought a knife in the kitchen, and the victim was the victim.

The table was bottomd by the victim, and the knife did not threaten the victim's knife with a knife and a knife.

In addition, the victim did not see the knife in the main room at the time of the defendant's use of the knife and the knife in the main room, but he recognized the fact that the defendant saw the knife in the main room only when the defendant laid the knife on the side floor.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Before the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the prosecutor examined the facts charged for the first time in the trial [criminal] of the facts charged for the first time in the trial, and then collected the food knife (35 cm in total length, 21 cm in knife length) in the main room and threatened the victim’s knife with knife and knife, and then killed knife in the knife.

“...”

A. C. H. H. H. L. H. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L.C.

The term "(35 cm in total length, 21 cm in length) was in the kitchen and threatened with the victim by taking a knife (35 cm in total length, 21 cm in length).

The judgment of the court below was impossible to maintain as it is, since the application for changes to the bill of amendment was filed, and the subject of the judgment was changed by this court's permission.

However, since the defendant denies the charges changed to the purport as alleged in the above facts and the misapprehension of the legal principles, it is to determine the following changed charges.

3. Determination on the Defendant’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the changed facts charged

A. The act of notifying harm in the crime of intimidation in the relevant legal doctrine is ordinarily based on ordinary language, as the case may be.