2. The lower court’s determination reflects the Defendant’s mistake while making a confession of the instant crime, and made efforts to recover damage by inserting a apology on the Internet bulletin board, etc. on which the Defendant written the instant crime after the instant crime, and that the Defendant had no record of criminal punishment, etc. are favorable to the Defendant.

However, the crime of this case is committed by the defendant on the Internet site, including Facebook, by posting a false writing as if the victim had a sexual intercourse at a total of four times, and by posting a false writing as if he had a person near the city of middle and high schools, thereby impairing the reputation of the victim, by insulting the victim two times in total, and by posting a message and a photograph to insult the victim, and by openly communicating with the victim by posting a false statement including the telephone number of the victim as if the victim was the victim and the victim had a alternate counseling for the purpose of causing damage to the victim, in view of the number, content, frequency, outcome, etc. of the crime, the crime of this case is deemed to be poor and heavy, and the victim would be expected to have suffered a very large mental impulse due to the crime of this case, and the damage is not recovered yet, and all of the sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, family environment, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below is unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.