If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

피고인은 천안시 동남구 C 아파트에 거주하면서, ‘D’라는 인터넷 카페를 운영하는 사람인바, 오랜 기간 동안 C 아파트 주변에 설치되어야 할 방음벽의 설치 여부가 결정이 되지 못하고 있는 것과 관련하여 같은 아파트에 거주하는 피해자 E가 위 카페에 글을 작성하자 그에 대해 댓글을 작성하였고 이후 피해자와 사이에 언쟁이 심화되던 중, 2012. 10. 5.경 위 인터넷 카페에 "제발 멍청한 척 짓어대지 말고. 니가 지금 무슨 짓을 한 건지 모르겠냐고 이XXXX야"라는 글을 게시한 것을 비롯하여 그 무렵부터 같은 해 12. 6.경까지 별지 범죄일람표 기재와 같이 총 7회에 걸쳐 피해자를 모욕하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion of the police statement protocol of Eul against the defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant's act is just a legitimate act that does not violate social norms, since the defendant's act was a legitimate act, from the defense source for the victim's gathering to the Internet car page.

However, "act which does not violate social norms" under Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to the act which can be accepted in light of the overall spirit of legal order or the social ethics or social norms surrounding it. Whether certain act is legitimate that does not violate social norms and thus, the illegality should be avoided, based on specific circumstances, and should be determined individually. Thus, in order to recognize such legitimate act, the following requirements should be met: (a) legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act; (b) reasonableness of the means or method of the act; (c) balance between the protected interests and the infringed interests; (iv) urgency; and (v) supplementaryness that there is no other means or method other than the act.