Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

On April 21, 2014, the Defendant made a public insult of the Victim F (hereinafter “E”) with the title “E”, “E, by accessing the Internet photograph community site (D) available to anyone, by referring to the comments “E”. In response, the Defendant made a public insult of the Victim F (hereinafter “E”) with the comments “E”.

Summary of Evidence

1. A’s legal statement;

1. Statement made to A by the police;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Article 311 of the Criminal Act and Article 311 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant's defense counsel on the claim of a justifiable act under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order asserts that the expression posted by the defendant is unlawful because it does not violate social rules and constitutes a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act. However, the contents of the statement posted by the defendant are merely a expression of a sacrific sentiment without presenting ordinary criticism or dissenting opinion on the victim's posting. Thus, the above form of insulting expressions do not violate social rules. Thus, the defense counsel's above assertion cannot be accepted.