A. The offense of insult by the misapprehension of the legal principle is established when a person expresses an abstract judgment or a sacrific sentiment that may undermine the people's social evaluation. The legal interest of the offense of insult is "social evaluation of human dignity". The contents of this part posted by the defendant are mainly related to D's projects, such as not attacking D's personality, but that D's projects are multi-level projects that regard D's projects as only some people's profits, and thus, the offense of insult is not established. In addition, since the defendant prepared and posted a letter for the purpose of public interest, it constitutes a justifiable act. 2) The punishment (1.5 million won of a fine) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts regarding the acquittal portion) continuously posted an expression that may undermine the social evaluation of D on his B B B B B, and written this part of the notice; (b) the victim D is a male and female, and the victim G uses the expression “day priority,” “actual learning,” and “cocon,” and (c) the expression “cocon,” in particular,” is an expression that is not used when the size of the office is inconsistent with the size of the office. In light of the overall purport of the notice, this part of the notice appears to suggest that the victim’s wheels is expressed in light of the overall purport, and this constitutes a “statement of fact.”

2. Determination

A. The part of the judgment of the court below as to the defendant's assertion 1 is alleged to the same purport, and the court below rejected the defendant's argument in determining the defendant's guilty of this part of the facts charged on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. The court below's aforementioned decision is just in light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the reasoning of the court