The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is reasonable to deem that the defendant had a criminal intent to directly or through the above E, taking into account the following facts: (a) the statement of the victim and the circumstances immediately after the crime of assault in this case was committed (the victim's office was contact with his staff member and the victim was reported to him; and (b) the victim was outside the office at the time of the crime of assault in this case; and (c) the victim was a victim who recorded the above E and the contents of the conversation of the defendant, it is reasonable to deem that the defendant had a criminal intent to threaten the victim directly or through the above E, but all of the facts charged in this case are erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case was the owner of the D Apartment 103 103 Dong 1015, who had been residing in the Republic of Korea by the victim C for about one year, and was demanding compensation from the victim regarding the damage to the facility.

1) 폭행의 점 피고인은 2012. 8. 16. 원주시 D아파트 102동 106호에 있는 피해자의 집으로 찾아와 피해자에게 종전에 살던 집으로 가보자고 요구하였으나 피해자가 아프다는 이유로 거절하자 피해자의 집 앞에 계속 서있으면서 피해자에게 종전에 살던 집으로 가보자고 요구하면서 경비실에 도움을 요청하러 밖으로 나오는 피해자의 어깨를 잡아당겨 피해자를 폭행하였다. 2) 협박의 점 피고인은 2012. 8. 20. 11:00경 원주시 D아파트 103동 1016호에 있는 피고인의 사무실에서 피해자가 듣고 있는 가운데 피해자의 친구인 E에게 마치 피해자에게 위해를 가할 것처럼 "시쳇말로 하면 저거 죽여, 저녁마다 내가 106호에 찾아가서 해결될 때까지 쟤를 찾는 거하고 소를 제기해서 출국금지조치 시킬거야, 1년이든 2년이든 민형사상...