Defendant

A and the prosecutor’s appeal against the Defendants are all dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s punishment (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 180 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

B. According to the Defendant’s statement and the Defendant’s statement at the prosecutor’s office, it was acknowledged that the Defendant made a threat to victims by stating that “the victims’ occupational errors are known to the press or the central government office,” and thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

2) Defendant A’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The lower court found Defendant B not guilty of this part of the facts charged while clearly explaining the grounds for the determination on the assertion of mistake as to Defendant B.

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below in the circumstances stated in the court below, i.e., victim I did not memory in the investigative agency and the court of the court below that the defendant would know about the amount of equipment.

When the defendant and the second met, it was pointed out that there was a central ministry's book-making institution during the friendly relationship with the defendant, but it was not argued that he would cause the problem by informing the Korean organ.

The fact that the defendant is able to know about the excessive sexuality issue with the media or the audit and inspection institution is one's judgment or criticism.

In light of the fact that “the victim I had already experienced a considerable psychological burden due to the receipt of the Defendant’s petition before the delivery of the Defendant, and the victim I had already been at the victim I’s request to withdraw the said petition even with the Defendant, and ③ the victim I prepared a written withdrawal of the petition in advance and received the signature of the Defendant and delivered KRW 10 million to the Defendant, it is reasonable to acknowledge and determine the facts of the lower court, and there was no error of mistake of facts as pointed out by the prosecutor of the lower judgment.

This part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

3...