1. The offense of insult under Article 311 of the Criminal Act is an offense, the legal interest of which is protected by the law, including the social evaluation of a person’s value. The offense of insult referred to in the offense of insult is an offense of insult, and refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or satisfic sentiment that may undermine a person’

(See Supreme Court Decision 87Do739 Decided May 12, 1987, and Supreme Court Decision 2003Do3972 Decided November 28, 2003). However, since language is the most fundamental means of human expression, and each person can have a speech habits, it cannot be punished as a crime of insult under the Criminal Act on the grounds that such expression is somewhat vague and indecent.

Therefore, if any expression is not likely to undermine the social evaluation of the other party’s personal value, such expression was expressed in a somewhat exceptional and indecent manner.

Even if this constitutes an element of the offense of insult, it shall not be deemed to constitute an element of insult.

(2) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court on September 10, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do2229, Sept. 10, 2015). 2. The Defendant was punished on June 10, 2014 due to the issue of taxi drivers and charges on the taxi on the roads in front of Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and reported at around 02:38,00 on the same day; the victim F, a police officer of the Seoul Dongjak Police Station, who was dispatched upon receipt of a report, arrived at the above location around 02:55 on the same day; the Defendant, even though having known the victim of the location of the Defendant at the time of reporting 112, did not find the above location and arrived late; and the Defendant tried to explain the circumstance in which the victim delayed arrival of the Defendant.

In addition to these facts, the relationship between the defendant and the victim recognized by the records.