Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

The defendant does not pay the above fine.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Ex officio determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, the prosecutor, ex officio, shall change the facts charged on the sixth trial date of the trial of the court of first instance as follows, and apply for the application of the law to change the applicable provisions into “Article 311 of the Criminal Act” under “Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act,” and the judgment of the court below was changed to the subject of the judgment upon permission. Thus, the court below became unable to maintain it

[Around March 15, 2015, the Defendant, on the recommendation of C at the Internet community of the film supervisory B managed by the Defendant, called “D” to E and C, a community member of the victim, respectively, in relation to the fact that D was admitted to the Internet community of the film supervisory B managed by the Defendant; “D is a large number of accidents in Busan; it is likely that B’s name may be sold to induce fraud; and it shall not be allowed to join F.).”

B. However, despite the existence of the reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, which will be examined below.

3. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant could fully recognize the fact of openly insulting the victim by making a statement to E and C as stated in the modified facts charged.

(1) The defendant is not more than the defendant's Internet community "F" established by B in I on the Internet site I.