모욕
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Fact-finding or misunderstanding of legal principles on the gist of the grounds of appeal (the defendant merely resisted to the idea that the execution of official duties by the police officer was improper, and did not insult the victim D, who is a police officer, and thereafter, the police officer abused and assaults the defendant. Thus, the judgment of the court below which recognized the crime of insult against the defendant was erroneous or misunderstanding of legal principles on the crime of insult and unfair sentencing.) and unfair sentencing.
2. The judgment of this Court
A. Unless there exist special circumstances, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the judgment of the first instance court on the ground that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance differs from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). In light of such legal principles, it is difficult to view that the lower court’s determination that the victim believed specific statements made in the court as a witness was clearly erroneous, or that it is considerably unreasonable to maintain such determination even if the victim’s result of an additional examination of evidence was made by the time of closing argument in the court of the first instance, it is obvious that the lower court’s determination that the victim D stated that “I would be different from the police officer, if you are the police officer, it does not accept the Defendant’s assertion that the crime of insult is an abstract act that may undermine the external reputation of the victim, and that it is not necessary for a third party to recognize that the victim’s reputation should be publicly known at the same time.