The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal cannot be seen as having been identified by the victim, and thus, it cannot be said that the expression “mar” cannot be deemed to have undermined the external reputation of the victim in a bulletin board where online connections are made for sexual traffic. However, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles.

2. In order to establish tort due to insult, the victim must be identified, but in the absence of a person’s name, the expression is deemed to have been identified if it is possible to find out who is identified in light of the surrounding circumstances and the contents of the expression (see Supreme Court Decision 93Da36622, May 10, 1994). The term “public performance” in the crime of insult refers to the state in which an unspecified or many unspecified persons can be identified.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7497, Sept. 8, 2011). In addition, the offense of insult is sufficient to publicly indicate an abstract judgment that may undermine a certain person’s external reputation, and the victim’s name and other personal information must be disclosed.

It is not necessary that the defendant is aware of the victim's personal information.

원심 및 당심에서 적법하게 채택ㆍ조사한 증거에 의하면, ① 인터넷 사이트 C(이하 ‘이 사건 사이트’라 한다)은 회원 간의 만남을 목적으로 개설된 것으로서, 일반인 누구나 자유롭게 회원가입이 가능하고, 회원이라면 누구나 글을 볼 수 있도록 공개되어 있었던 점, ② 피해자 F는 이 사건 사이트 중 ‘그에게/그녀에게 물어봐!’ 게시판(이하 ‘이 사건 게시판’이라 한다)에서 탈퇴와 가입을 반복하기는 하였으나 10년에 걸쳐 ‘H’라는 동일한 필명을 사용하면서 I와 숫자를...