The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the assertion on admissibility of a recording file, the lower court did not constitute illegally collected evidence, since the recording of N’s conversations by one of the parties who made a telephone conversation with the Defendant does not violate Article 3(1) of the Communications Secret Protection Act, on the grounds that the recording of N’s conversations does not violate Article 3(1) of the Communications Secret Protection Act, or the recording file of the instant telephone conversation, which appears as the file rerecording the N’s conversations or as the duplicate of the file.

Based on the judgment, the defendant's argument of grounds for appeal is rejected.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the admissibility of evidence of the recording file of telephone conversations.

2. As to the assertion on the conspiracy and intent of the crime of coercion, the lower court, on the part of the Defendant and the President, was aware that there was a combination of intent to commit the instant crime that caused F to withdraw from the management of G, and that the Defendant’s act with N may constitute coercion.

Based on the judgment, the defendant's argument of grounds for appeal is rejected.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the conspiracy and intent of coercion, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.