The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is that the contents of comments posted by the defendant on the bulletin board of this case seriously compromises the victim's social evaluation, and such expressive act cannot be deemed to be within the scope of social norms, and thus, the court below rendered a judgment not guilty on the ground that it does not violate the social norms, and thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: (a) the Defendant is a company with D graduate schools and graduates’ Internet community bulletin board (hereinafter “instant freely accepted bulletin board”) within a company where the Defendant, on February 11, 2012, is working in Suwon-si C on February 11, 2012.

) On the ground that the victim F’s plagiarism, etc. committed an act in line with the occupation of plagiarism, etc., the victim publicly insultingd the victim by posting the comments stating “I am hye hye hye hye hye hye hye hye hye hye hye hy

In the crime of insult as referred to in the crime of insult, the expression of an abstract judgment or a sacrific sentiment that may undermine the people’s social evaluation without a statement of fact is an expression of an abstract judgment or a sacrific sentiment. Even in a case where an expression of opinion contains especially insulting expressions, if such expression can be deemed an act that does not contravene the social norms in light of the sound social norms of the times, illegality is exceptionally dismissed pursuant to Article 20 of the Criminal Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1433, Jul. 10, 2008). In addition, the content posted as comments by the Defendant on the instant free bulletin board, as indicated in the facts charged, may be viewed as an insulting speech that damages the social evaluation of the value of F, a professor of D graduate school, or that expresses a sacrific sentiment.

However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, ① D graduate schools on November 17, 201.