Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the charged facts of this case. The court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined that the offense of insult under Article 311 of the Criminal Act is a crime that legally protects an external reputation, which refers to a social evaluation of the value of a person; and the offense of insult referred to in the offense of insult refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that may undermine a person’s social evaluation, without revealing the facts.

Therefore, if a certain expression is not likely to undermine the social evaluation of the other party’s personal value, it cannot be deemed that the expression constitutes the elements of the crime of insult even if it was expressed in a somewhat unusual manner (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do229, Sept. 10, 2015). After explaining the legal principles, “H” is the name of a gratory product manufactured in Busan area. The notice of this case is merely based on the sound similarity between “E” and “H”, which is the victim’s name, and the expression of the same degree as the above notice is merely based on the expression of the same as the above one of the above notice.

On the ground that it is difficult to see it, the lower court acquitted the instant charges.

B. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in the circumstances stated in the judgment of the court below, i.e., the defendant, in relation to the victim's game in the game hosting room called "C," the defendant, while engaging in a verbal dispute with one another in relation to the victim's game, she was the victim's "drasing off the defendant's clinic" and the E name.