3. 8. up to August, 198, a person who had worked as a vice-director in the fisheries company C located in Dong-gu, Nam-gu, Dong-gu, and the complainant D (Nam, 43 years old) is the N Director of the above corporation.

On March 11, 2019, when the Defendant was dismissed on the grounds of the studio of the company’s image in the Seo-gu E apartment and F, and the 20th employees of the said corporation, the Defendant made a public insult of the complainant by referring to “H,, and such garbage, H, and liner liners, H-type garbage, human garbage, human garbage, opening-type DN,” and referring to “H, and such garbage, H, and such garbage, H-type garbage, human garbage, and open-type DN”.

2. Determination and conclusion

A. Where a criminal trial becomes final and conclusive and conclusive, it shall not be repeatedly punished for the same crime, and where a public prosecution is instituted against the same case with a final and conclusive judgment, a judgment of acquittal shall be pronounced (Article 326 subparagraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act). In the case of an ordinary concurrence relationship under Article 40 of the Criminal Act, res judicata effect of a final and conclusive judgment on one of them shall also extend to other crimes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do10233, Feb. 23, 2007).

According to the records, the Defendant sent to the victim I (J) a message “I and I am linerdly, I am on the ground that 10 employees of the fisheries company C were forced to make an unfair dismissal at the G hosting room where 17:47 is unknown,” from that time until 20:20 of the same day, the Defendant sent to the victim I (J) the message “I and I am on the ground that she was forced to make an unfair dismissal.”

“The facts charged are recognized on September 27, 2019 by serving a fine of KRW 3 million on September 19, 2019, which became final and conclusive on September 27, 2019, after being prosecuted for facts constituting an offense (this Court Decision 2019 High Court Decision 2299, 2019 High Court Decision 3 million won).

C. In light of the above facts of recognition and relevant legal principles, the Defendant’s message at the same time with the same message, and each of the above victims I.