The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding the part not guilty in the judgment of the court below which erred in the misapprehension of legal principles, the defendant's speech constitutes an insulting speech that infringes the victim's external reputation, but did not infringe the victim's external reputation.

The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. 모욕의 점과 관련된 공소사실의 요지 이 사건 모욕의 점의 공소사실 요지는 피고인은 2016. 3. 29. 12:05 경 제 1 항과 같은 장소에서, E 등 농협 직원 5~6 명이 있는 가운데 112 신고를 받고 출동한 광주 서부 경찰서 K 파출소 소속 경위인 피해자 J에게 “야 이 씹할 놈 아, 느그 들은 뭣하러 왔어,

It is the case that the victim openly insultd the victim by taking a bath over several times "Is like the sick son."

3. The lower court determined that the crime of insult referred to in the crime of insult refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or a sacrific sentiment that could undermine the people’s social evaluation without mentioning the facts, and the legal interest that the crime of insult intends to protect is not an individual subjective reputation but a person’s external reputation, but rather, the Defendant took the same bath as the aforementioned paragraph 2.

the victim’s honor has been damaged or the social evaluation has been deteriorated;

It is difficult to see that such an expression leads to a victim’s fear of insult or serious injury to the victim.

Even if the offense of insult is not established, the acquittal was pronounced on the ground that the offense of insult cannot be seen as established.

4. Determination on whether a deliberation was made

A. The offense of insult of a general legal doctrine is established when a person is openly insulting (Article 311 of the Criminal Act). It is a legal interest that protects an external reputation, referring to a social evaluation of a person’s value. Here, the insult is not a statement of fact, but an abstract judgment or a sacrific assessment, which is likely to undermine a person’s social assessment.