The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (the amount of 500,000 won) is unreasonable because it is too unfluent.

2. In a case where two or more persons are insultd ex officio by judgment, several offenses of insult by victim are established, and in a case where two or more persons are insultd by one act, several offenses of insult are in the relationship of conceptual concurrence.

In light of these legal principles, since the Defendant’s public health team and the Defendant simultaneously insulted two victims, who are police officers dispatched to the site as stated in its reasoning, the crime of insult is established for each victim, and each of such insulting crimes is in a mutual mutual concurrence, the lower court committed an unlawful act that is deemed to be a single crime.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed, and the following is again decided after pleading.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the description of each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 311 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Provisional Payment Order is that the instant crime was committed against the police officers dispatched to the site upon receiving a report of 112.

In light of the fact that the defendant was punished for the same kind of crime, such as obstructing the police officer's performance of official duties and insulting the police officer in 2019, it is necessary to impose liability corresponding to the degree of illegality in light of the fact that the defendant committed a second offense.

provided, however, that the crime is committed.