1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment and the evidence duly admitted by the lower court in light of the records, the lower court’s finding the Defendant guilty of violating the Housing Act among the facts charged in the instant case is acceptable. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to interpretation of Article 98 Subparag. 9 of the Housing Act, by misapprehending the legal doctrine

In this case where a fine is sentenced, the reason that the amount of punishment is unreasonable shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. On the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the grounds that there was no proof of criminal facts as to the violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (Defamation) and insult of the facts charged in the instant

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the court below’s aforementioned measures are acceptable, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as to defamation or insult.

3. All appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.