Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in misapprehension of legal principles.

2. The "act that does not violate the social rules" under Article 20 of the Criminal Code 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, and as a legitimate act that does not violate the social norms, the illegality of certain act should be avoided, based on specific circumstances, and it should be determined individually by considering the motive or purpose of the act, the reasonableness of the means or method of the act, the balance between the legal interests of the third protected interests and infringed interests, the fourth urgency, and the fifth supplementary nature that there is no other means or method other than the act.

(2) In light of the above legal principles and records, the Defendant did not appear to have been aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant did not properly respond to the Defendant’s question in the course of receiving medical treatment by visiting the victim’s home at first time, which was duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, and then written the same article as the facts charged. In light of the contents, the Defendant did not have to respond to the Defendant’s question in the process of receiving medical treatment by visiting the victim’s home at first time, on the basis of objective facts, data, etc., and rather than for the legitimate purpose of the consumer’s right to know, the Defendant’s expression of the fact that the Defendant was made up of the victim’s face