The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of this case is publicly notified.

1. 공소사실의 요지 피고인은 2014. 6. 14. 08:46경 성남시 분당구 이매동에 있는 지하철 이매역 1번 출구 앞에서, 피고인이 C 교회에 관하여 1인 시위를 하고 있던 중 교인인 피해자 D이 피고인에게 소리를 지르지 말라고 요구를 하자 E, F 등 3, 4명이 있는 자리에서 피해자에게 “너 정관수술 했다며 너 좆대가리 짤랐냐 너 씨 없지 으하하하! 하나님이 그걸 왜 줬겠냐. 그걸 왜 짜르니 ”라고 말하며 공연히 피해자를 모욕하였다.

2. The “public performance” in the crime of insult and insult refers to the state in which many, unspecified or unspecified persons can be recognized. Thus, if there is a possibility that a certain fact about a certain person might be disseminated to an unspecified or unspecified person, the requirements of the public performance are satisfied, but if there is no possibility that it might otherwise be disseminated, the public performance is lacking.

(See Supreme Court Decision 83Do49 delivered on April 10, 1984, etc.). However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court: (a) the defendant was a member of the same religious organization (hereinafter “C church”) as the victim; (b) the defendant was a member of the above religious organization (hereinafter “C church”); and (c) the F was a member of the above religious organization (hereinafter “member of the above religious organization) with the defendant, who was working at the victim group of the above religious organization, for the purpose of collecting evidence in preparation for interference with the defendant’s one-person demonstration, it is difficult to view that E and F had the possibility of spreading the defendant’s horses to other persons than the investigative agency.

In addition, evidence reveals that at the time the defendant did not use a loudspeaker, etc., the victim’s speech is acknowledged. Considering the location and time of the instant case, the evidence submitted by the prosecution alone is neither E nor F, nor E nor F.