The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. The defendant misunderstanding of facts merely cited a siren on his hand, did not display it, or did not contact the body of the victim E, nor did he notify the victim of specific harm.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of all the facts charged that the defendant had dangerous objects and threatened the victim, is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. “Intimidation”, which is required for the establishment of a crime of intimidation of mistake, generally refers to a threat of harm sufficient to cause fear to a person who has become the other party. Whether such a threat of harm or injury constitutes a threat of harm or injury ought to be determined by comprehensively taking into account 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 and status between the offender and the other party, and degree of friendship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do10451, Aug. 17, 2012). The act of notifying that a threat of harm or harm in the crime of intimidation would normally be based on language, but depending on the case, it may also be said that the act of notifying such

(See Supreme Court Decision 74Do2727 delivered on October 7, 1975). The following circumstances revealed in accordance with the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below and the court below, namely, ① the victim was present at the court below as a witness and stated in the court below that “the defendant has threatened him with a threat, as he uses a pipe siren, and was in a large amount at the time.” ② The victim’s father, the victim’s father, also made a statement to the effect that the victim’s statement is consistent with the above statements at the court below, ② the victim’s father, and ③ the Defendant was present as a witness at the court below and made a statement to the effect that the victim’s statement is consistent with the above statements.