The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The Defendant, as a DNA reporter, is the former E reporter. A.

Around July 4, 2013, the Defendant: (a) through Internet D, up to July 4, 2013, read the case of F, F, and F, and E, 2, i.e., i., i., e, by removing existing reporters and selecting new reporters; (b) by selecting the container under the title of “under the title of F,” and then seeing that the news was entirely broken out. The time charterer driven from the e flag and the main department of the e flag, i.e., h., h., h., h., h. to interview a person living in the south at the time of the strike with the principal of the e, h., h., h., h., h., g., h. to the effect that G accounts for the remaining place of the Gu master who was put in for the long-term strike business under the title of E.g., g., h., h.

B. On May 8, 2014, through Internet D around May 2014, the Defendant: (a) stuffed G Articles that the Defendant distorted the effect of Dice level to his family members of the Sewol ferry; and (b) inserted G and E’s interview around June 2012 with G, which was extracted by H during the strike period; and (c) inserted the interview with G; and (d) spreaded the public broadcast E. The broadcasts are not the news created by the containerer rather than the reporter. The broadcasts of various minutes of viewing will be absolute in the public wave.

2. Determination

A. The offense of insult as referred to in the relevant legal doctrine refers to an abstract judgment or a sacrific sentiment, which does not indicate facts, and instead expresses an abstract judgment or a sacrific sentiment which could undermine a person’s evaluation. Even in cases where a certain writing contains judgment or opinion that includes an insulting expression, if such expression can be seen as an act that does not contravene the social norms in light of the sound social norms of the time, it shall be in accordance with Article 20