The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as stated in the facts charged in this case, did not inform the victim of the misunderstanding of facts, and the dispositive act by the victim is not based on the defective declaration of intent due to the Defendant’s attack, but rather a disposal act by the victim.

There is no intention of illegal acquisition to the defendant.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of suspended execution in August, and eight hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) On the assertion of mistake of facts, intimidation is a means of a threat of harm by the defendant's threat of harm and a victim's threat of harm and a threat of harm that may cause severe harm to the freedom of decision-making or the freedom of decision-making. The threat of harm and injury does not necessarily require the method of specification, and it is sufficient if the defendant has the awareness that it would cause harm to the other party by language or scambling, etc., and even if not directly, it may indirectly be made through a third party other than the person who is a threat. In addition, even if the perpetrator demands the delivery of property or property benefits by using illegal above age based on his occupation, status, bad character and behavior, experience, etc., and if the other party fails to comply with such demand, it may cause an unreasonable disadvantage (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do1565, Jul. 15, 2005). 205, comprehensively taking into account the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the court below, each of the evidence duly adopted and the following facts charged charged.