A. Although the Defendant made a statement of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as stated in the facts charged, the term “scam” is a mixed standard, and the term “scam” is not a intimidation, but a threat is not an insult, and it does not seem to be “nicking.e.,”

In addition, the above remarks were intended to mislead the defendant, and there was no intention to insult the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The offense of insult of a mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is established when a person openly insults another person. The legal interest protected by the law is the external reputation meaning a social evaluation of a person’s value. Here, insult refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or a sacrific sentiment that may undermine a person’s social assessment without indicating any fact.

In addition, the offense of insult is established by openly expressing an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that may undermine the external reputation of the victim, and therefore the external reputation of the victim is not practically infringed or the risk of infringement is not likely to occur in a concrete real situation.

(대법원 2016. 10. 13. 선고 2016도9674 판결 등 참조). 피고인이 동료직원들 앞에서 퇴근을 거부하는 피해자에게 화가 난다는 이유로 갑자기 “씨발 뭘 쳐다보나. 눈깔을 파버릴라”, “지랄 니가 뭔데”라고 큰소리로 말한 것은 피해자에 대한 경멸적 감정을 표현한 것으로서, 사람의 가치에 대한 사회적 평가를 저하시키는 행위에 해당한다.

Even if there was a subjective intent to force the defendant as alleged by the defendant, there is no influence on recognizing the intention of insult.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. Specific contents of insulting remarks on the assertion of unfair sentencing; and