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

The Defendant’s believers, the victim C is a son of the temple, which was a previous relationship with the past.

1. On August 15, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 07:35, 2015, the Defendant: (b) was a manager of the new interest of “D” located in the power line of Gangwon-do, which was operated by the injured party; (c) and (d) the Defendant: (d) the Defendant was under an order of care at a reasonable level; and (d) the Defendant Hahnhhhn

In addition to sending the text message on a mobile phone, the victim was openly insultingd by sending the text message on a mobile phone to the above E five occasions in total, as in the first page of crime from around 10:04 to August 18, 2015.

2. On June 19, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 17:46, to F, the believers of the foregoing “D”, “A person who is not in the Republic of Korea, but in the Republic of Korea, the public, according to his/her gross area.”

In addition to sending the text message on a mobile phone, “The victim publicly insultingd the victim by openly sending the text message on a total of six occasions from around that time to August 12:07, 2015, i.e., the crime table 2 to the above F, such as the crime list 2.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness C and E;

1. A complaint and related documents (detailed descriptions of each letter among attached documents);

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that there is no possibility of spreading letters even if they are sent out to him in the relation of operation and management of D. The defendant and his defense counsel, ① they do not fall under the insult of the defendant's letter sent by him, ② E, F and the victim jointly do not fall under the insulting words, and ② they are in the relation of operation and management of D.

In the crime of insult, insult as referred to in the crime of insult is an expression of abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that may undermine the people’s social evaluation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do3972, Nov. 28, 2003). However, in light of the contents of each letter sent by the Defendant, the ordinary meaning of expression, and the method of use, etc., the degree of insult is minor.