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

The Defendant, at a place where it is unknown on April 10, 2017, posted the article of 'D' on the SNS 'SNS 'C' in which many people are viewed as a large number of people, and under the article, the Defendant’s phrase “the crime of 'D' is the crime of 's death of a large number of people', or 's death of a large number of people' is the crime of 'flaging the large number of people' and 'flaging the large number of people', and 'flaging the large number of people' and 'flaging the large number of people' should be the most problem.

If a crime of death of a member of the top party is committed, I tried to write off the victim E's comments whether who is not guilty in the world.

On the same day, around 11:23, the Defendant: (a) was aware of the fact that a female victim E was wrong with the knowledge that he/she would be able to close the male test, and that he/she did not go under the direction of the victim’s comments to defend the victimized female of the relevant engineer E.

As long as bread is not boomed in a lucent for female bath, it shall be seen as soon as possible.

It seems to be the same as a sacrificing and sacrificing. "Publicly insulting the victim's comments on the comments."

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reporting;

1. Article 311 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 311 of the choice of punishment;

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

1. Determination on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the argument and the defense counsel followed the defendant's writing on the victim's comments posted in the article recorded in the facts of crime by pro-gu F, and the defendant's writing on the F's writing was merely written in F's writing for the purpose of avoiding his opinion by reporting the above article and the comments posted in the article of crime, and the above written writing was not written in the article of the above article but written in the article of the victim's writing on the comments posted by the victim.