The defendant shall be innocent.

. The victim insultingd by undermining the social evaluation of the victim’s personal value.

2. Determination

A. The offense of insult under Article 311 of the Criminal Act is an offense that protects an external reputation, which means a social evaluation of a person’s value, and refers to an offense of insult, which refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that may undermine a person’s social evaluation without revealing facts.

Therefore, even if a certain expression is not likely to undermine the social evaluation of the other party’s personal value, it cannot be deemed as constituting the elements of the crime of insult, even if it was expressed in a somewhat unusual manner (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do229, Sept. 10, 2015). (b) According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated in this court, the following circumstances can be acknowledged.

(1) Terms that may undermine the social evaluation of the victim among the contents stated in the facts charged are ‘*****k', ‘Bk'.

As can be seen, “unclaimed human beings,” “place,” and “Isk”, first of all, we look at “***”.

‘*****k' is unclear as it has been used in the meaning of ‘fuk' as it has been used in the sense of ‘fuk', referring to ‘fuk'.

“If used in the meaning “”, the victim did not explicitly indicate any ar, thereby undermining the victim’s personal value.

In other words, “fuk” can not be seen as a phrase used simply to express the other party’s complaint or fuck’s opinions, which is an infuk and indecent expression that may diseasure the other party, but it is difficult to readily conclude that it constitutes an insulting speech that expresses a destructive sentiment that may undermine the social evaluation of the personal value of the victim (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do622, Dec. 24, 2015). 2.