A. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or mistake of facts, although the prior meaning of the "pathm" is "as it must be done in the way that it should be done as a human being," it should be interpreted arbitrarily as "act of self-grasing against the lineal ascendant and descendant such as parents, etc.," and it cannot be viewed as separate activities of SNS between the victim and his/her female relatives, but without considering it, it constitutes a crime of insult since the defendant expressed an expression of facts in the facts charged in a situation unrelated to a specific speech of the victim. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In addition to the circumstances described in the judgment of the court below, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and legal principles, and considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., "h., a failure" as "h. that must be a human being" can be seen as an expression of a victim's "h.m. with a closed-to-face" or "h.m. with a dead-wheeled will" or "h.m. with a dead-to-p.m." which could undermine the social evaluation of the victim. Thus, as long as the defendant used the above expression by referring the victim to the victim, it appears to constitute a crime of insult against the victim. Moreover, it is not a sound criticism against the victim's specific speech and behavior in the Internet space where many and unspecified persons work, but a comprehensive expression of "h.m." as "h.m. with the victim" is the same as the victim's SNS activity.