logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2018.11.29 2018노452
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(보복협박등)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as a misunderstanding of facts, only made the victims with the “Isn't have to do anything,” and made an examination, and did not have made a threat of harm for the purpose of retaliation.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) against an unfair defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the assertion of mistake of fact 1) The term "Intimidation" in the crime of intimidation as to whether the act of the defendant constitutes "Intimidation" generally refers to the expression of harm that may cause fear to a person. As such, an intentional act as a subjective constituent element does not require any intent or desire to actually realize the harm that the actor knows and cites the threat of harm to such degree. However, if the actor's speech and behavior is merely merely an expression of simple emotional humiliation or temporary labor, and it is objectively evident that there is no intention to harm in light of the surrounding circumstances, the intent of intimidation or temporary labor cannot be acknowledged (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do329, Mar. 25, 2005). This legal principle likewise applies to determining whether a crime of intimidation constitutes a special crime of intimidation or a intimidation as to the requirements for aggravated constituent constituent elements as to the crime of intimidation.

In light of the above legal principles, when considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the health team, the lower court, and the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it is difficult to view the content of harm and injury that the Defendant informed to the victims who are women, as being sufficient to cause fears to the general public. It is difficult to view that the content of harm and injury that the Defendant informed to the victims who are women, was merely an emotional humiliation, etc., and the fact that the Defendant did not have any intention to harm the victims does not interfere with recognizing

(1) The defendant.

arrow