The sentence of sentence shall be suspended for the defendant.

The judgment of the court below which acquitted all of the primary and conjunctive charges of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Judgment on the primary facts charged

A. On October 31, 2016, at around 14:08, the Defendant: (a) held a temporary general meeting of the merchants’ association in front of the Ccafeteria, Daegu Northern-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul-gu, at around 14:08, and (b) held that the victim D would be the president of the merchants’ association and embezzled public funds, and he would not be aware of why he would continue to be connected with the criminal.

The victim openly insultingd the victim by speaking in a large voice.

B. On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court rendered a not guilty of the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds that the words such as the statement in the facts charged can not be seen as insult if they publicly indicate the facts.

(c)

1) The offense of insult as referred to in the crime of insult 1) refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that could undermine the social assessment of a person without indicating the facts (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do1453, Dec. 23, 2005, etc.). 2) In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it is recognized that the defendant had made the same statement as the facts charged to the members of the B market merchants' associations. As such, such expression is an expression of criticism or criticism of the victim. At the time, the victim requested formal trial after receiving a summary order by embezzlement, and the trial was pending, it is an abstract judgment or abstract judgment that may undermine the social assessment of the victim.