A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles recognize the fact that the Defendant posted the same article as the facts constituting the crime as indicated in the judgment of the court below on the Kakao Stockholm Office.

However, in order to secure transparency in the interest and accounting management of the school members of the FF group, the defendant did not have any intention to insult the defendant in the process of referring to the accounting problem of the victim, who is the FF Chairperson.

The defendant's act is "The defendant's act is now a certified broker office."

The illegality is excluded as an act that does not go against the social rules and is a legitimate act because it is written as " and found in the Defendant's workplace."

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court also argued that the Defendant is identical to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the following grounds: (a) the Defendant’s intent to insult the Defendant was recognized and the Defendant’s act did not constitute a violation of social norms.

Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, a thorough examination of the evidence reveals that the defendant's act did not meet the legitimacy of the purpose and the reasonableness of the means, and that it did not meet the requirements for emergency performance supplement.

I would like to say.

Therefore, the lower court’s determination that found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged is justifiable, and this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. The fact that there is no record of criminal punishment against the Defendant that the sentencing is unfair is favorable to the Defendant, but the degree of insulting expressions expressed in the comments of the instant case is somewhat weak.