The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On March 12, 2017, around 12:58, the summary of the facts charged was sent by the Defendant’s office “D” located near the C Station located in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, with a cell phone in the Kakao Group E and the Kakao Group E where the Defendant participated in the conversation in the Kakao Group E and F, and “B B B B B B B B before ever;

7. The phrase “to promptly take place 7.” refers to the victim H (33 years old) of E’s friendly female job offers in order to care for women who have sexual relations with E, and “H and G are in favor of them.”

The message “” (hereinafter referred to as “the message of this case”) sent.

Accordingly, the defendant openly insultingd the victim.

2. Determination

A. Public performance in the crime of defamation or insult means a state in which many, unspecified or unspecified persons can be recognized. Although a fact was disseminated to an individual person, if there is a possibility of spreading it to an unspecified or unspecified person, the requirement of performance should be satisfied, but if there is no possibility of spreading it differently, the spread to a specific person shall be deemed to have no public performance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7497, Sept. 8, 2011). Meanwhile, in a case where public performance is acknowledged on the grounds of the possibility of dissemination as above, there is a need for dolusence at least as a subjective element of the constituent elements of the crime, and there is a need to be an awareness of the possibility of dissemination, as well as an intent to deliberate to allow the risk. Whether the actor was aware of the possibility of dissemination should be confirmed from the standpoint of the offender, considering how to evaluate the possibility of dissemination if the general public is based on specific circumstances, such as the form of the act, and the situation of the act, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 20107Do707.).