모욕
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (legal scenarios) corresponds to the expression of abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that may undermine the social evaluation of the victim, and the expression used by the defendant is deemed to be a criticism against the victim even in light of the whole content of the notice, and thus, the defendant's act cannot be deemed not to be in violation of the social rules, since the expression appears to be in a criticism against the victim, and it cannot be viewed as an insulting expression that was partially partially used. Thus, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, but the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the objective elements of the offense of insult and the judgment of justifiable act.
2. The court below held that although the Defendant publicly posted any writing containing the contents in the facts charged on the Internet car page, the part of the facts charged, namely, the part that the victim claimed as insult, namely, “whether the hospital affiliated with the counseling expenses would be well able to treat a person without a person’s license,” “I do not know that it is not written, but would be the same as that of writing,” and “I ambling the device necessary for ice digging,” is limited to the extent that the whole counseling attitude of the hospital operated by the victim, the degree of the victim’s appearance or attitude, and it is difficult to conclude that the content constitutes an insulting expression by social norms, as an expression of abstract judgment or light-abruptive appraisal that may undermine the social assessment of the victim, even if it is difficult to conclude that the content constitutes an insulting expression.
Even if the defendant reads the books written by the victim and appears to have used them as the title of this article by using the title, and the hospital operated by the victim is operated by the defendant.