When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The Defendant is an online social network service (SNS) account of “E”, and victim F is a person who works in “G”, respectively.

The Defendant and the victim posted comments on comments in the “I” bulletin from the public account of H of the members of the Kakao Kakao H.

이에 피고인은 2016. 3. 13. 경 서울 강남구 J 인근에 있는 피고인의 집에서 휴대전화를 이용하여 카카오 스토리에 접속한 후, 위 ‘I’ 의 2016. 3. 13. 19:43 게시물에서 피해자와 상호 댓 글로 시비하던 중, 피해자를 지칭하며 ‘G 긍 까 그 이야기가 먼 줄 알고 니가 안다고 하는 거냐고 이 멍 청아 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 그거 K 이야기다

In other words, the victim was openly insultingd three times in total from September 21, 2015 to September 21, 2015 by posting comments on the “YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of L partially every witness;

1. Entry of the defendant in part in the first trial record;

1. Statement made by the witness F in the third public trial records;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Part concerning the statement of M among copies of the police interrogation protocol regarding M;

1. A copy of the F police statement;

1. A copy of the judgment (Seoul Southern District Court 2016 High Court 149).

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the petition for accusation, copies of each Kakao Scaro Scarto, and transcript copies;

1. According to the pertinent legal provisions on criminal facts, Article 311 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines (as stated in the judgment below, the following circumstances are recognized.

① The Defendant, considering that “N” is an account used by the victim, posted comments on each statement of facts constituting a crime in mind, with the victim’s mind.

(2) A number of participation in a detention room as at the time.