We reverse the judgment of the court below.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding 1) Defluence 1) The Defendant’s insult (the first judgment) did not take a bath solely on the ground that D had a front door, as stated in the judgment of the court below, but did not take a bath in the process of D’s fluence against the defect of verbal abuse and assault by generating the Defendant’s house (the second judgment). (2) The Defendant filed a complaint on the ground that D’s fluence was attached to D’s house fluence and attached a paper stating the purport that D’s son and her son and son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son

B. In light of the legal principles (a) 1, there is no possibility that the Defendant might spread to unspecified or unspecified persons solely on the basis of the witness’s remarks made by the Defendant for lack of public performance. 2) The Defendant asserted a legitimate act only when he heard a bath from approximately 50 cm D, which led D to the Defendant to take a bath in order to oppose it. This constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate the social rules.

C. Each sentence sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing (the first sentence: a fine of one million won, and the second sentence: a fine of three hundred thousand won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the case of appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance, which is the case of appeal against the judgment of the court of second instance, was consolidated in the oral proceedings of the court of second instance, which is the case of appeal against the judgment of the court of second instance. The case of this court of second instance, which is the case of appeal against the judgment of the court of second instance, was consolidated in the oral proceedings of the court of second instance. Each of the crimes recognized by the court of first and second instance against the defendant is in the relation of concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and should be sentenced to one punishment within the scope of the term of punishment increased by concurrent crimes

However, there is a reason to reverse the above ex officio.