Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles: (a) the Defendant: (a) was frightening down the sofinite, making the sofinites under the sofinites; (b) did not have any find the sofinites in the direction of C; (c) did not have any find the sofinites in the direction of C; (d) did not have any find the sofins with C; (f) did not have any find the two arms; (c) did not violate the social rules even if he did not have any f in the F; and (d) did not have any words related to the work attitude, such as that C did not have any f in the said place, and (e) the Defendant made the said remarks with G, even if he did not have any f in the said manner, it does not violate the social rules, and thus, illegality is excluded.

B. The lower court’s sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (two million won of fine) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the Prosecutor insultings the victim by stating that “The Defendant, around early December 201, 201, at the time of the first instance trial on the charges, reported the victim C and the womb with smartphone fluor, while working with G and meals as company staff at the Vietnam-dong, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do, it was difficult to work together, so it is difficult to say that C is not suitable to work and that C is not properly serving,” and publicly insulting the victim by stating that “the Defendant did not amend the amendment of the Act to his reputation from the office by openly stating that it was “when working the amendment of the Act.”