The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the circumstances where the victim used the expression “D” at the time of his school, the Defendant prepared comments as stated in the judgment below in order to point out that it is inappropriate, and the victim is recognized as being widely criticized for public speech and behavior inappropriate as a church pastor, and the victim who is a pastor is currently disputing the division of the members, posting a notice of the same degree of expression as indicated in the judgment of the court below in order to criticize the Internet community of the members in light of the circumstances where the members dispute over the division, etc., it does not constitute an insulting expression or the illegality is removed.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (200,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of legal principles, the term “defluence” as referred to in the crime of insult is an expression of an abstract judgment or a sacrific sentiment that could undermine the people’s social evaluation without a statement of facts. Even in cases where a certain article contains especially insulting expressions, if such expression can be deemed an act that does not violate the social norms in light of the sound social norms in the era, illegality is exceptionally dismissed pursuant to Article 20 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do1433, Jul. 10, 2008; 2010Do6462, Feb. 23, 2012). 2) In light of the contents and degree of the expressions written by the Defendant’s comments, the degree of insulting expressions in the comments, the weight of insulting expressions in the comments, the victim’s opinion, etc. pointed out by the Defendant, it cannot be seen as an act of insult as an act of insult as prescribed in the judgment below.

3) Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. As to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, it is recognized that the Defendant did not take any measures to protect the victim.

2) However, the defendant has no criminal history for the same kind of crime, and the defendant.