The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding that the defendant committed an act identical to the facts charged in the instant case; however, the defendant's intent to return to a family using the victim's mind in a de facto marital relationship is not to threaten the victim.

B. The sentence (one million won of fine) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In order to establish a crime of intimidation on a mistake of facts, the content of the harm and danger notified shall be sufficient to cause fears to a person generally in light of various circumstances before and after the act, such as the offender and the other party’s tendency, surrounding circumstances at the time of notification, and the degree of friendship and status between the offender and the other party. However, as long as the other party recognizes its meaning by notifying the harm and danger to such an extent that it does not require the other party to feel a fear, the elements of the crime shall be deemed to have been satisfied, regardless of whether the other party realistically caused fear, and the crime of intimidation shall be interpreted to have been committed.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2007Do606 Decided September 28, 2007). Moreover, the act of notifying harm and injury in a crime of intimidation may be a threat of harm and injury, as a matter of ordinary language, or as a case may be, depending on the case where the crime of intimidation is committed.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14316, Jan. 27, 2011). According to the Defendant’s legal statement in the lower court, the prosecutor’s office, and the protocol of statement by the police, etc., the fact that the Defendant committed an act identical to the instant facts charged

The defendant's self-injury attempt and text message transmission constitutes intimidation against the victim, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the victim at the time when the defendant committed each of the above acts, who was the victim.