Nevertheless, since the court below acquitted the victim of the facts charged in this case on the ground that the victim was not specified, it erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment

2. We examine the judgment, even though considering the social hazard or the necessity of regulation of the malicious comments on the Internet, such as the prosecutor's assertion, the offense of insult under the current law is established by insulting a certain person or an organization possessing character, as stated in detail by the court below. Thus, the victim whose external reputation is infringed by insulting expressions, i.e., the victim's Internet ID should be identified. As in this case, only the victim's Internet ID can be known as the victim's insulting expressions, i.e., the contents of the comments written by the victim, the contents of the comments written by the victim, and the scope of use of the Internet bulletin board, etc., if it is difficult to find who uses such Internet ID, and there is no other evidence to see them, the victim cannot be deemed to have been identified as the victim of the offense of insult, which is protected by the law of external reputation, and therefore, the offense of insult against a specific person cannot be established.

Therefore, the court below's decision of not guilty of the facts charged in this case is just and acceptable, and the judgment of the court below did not err by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles as alleged by the prosecutor, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.