The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In order to clearly express his or her opinion on preferential suspicions against the victims raised by the media, the Defendant merely written comments on Internet news articles, such as the facts charged, and did not intend to indicate the sacrific sentiment against the victims, nor did he or she make an abstract judgment without any basis.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The offense of insult or insult of a factual mistake is established when a person is openly insulting (Article 311 of the Criminal Act). It is a crime that protects an external reputation, which means a social evaluation of a person’s value. Here, the term “absing desire” refers to expressing an abstract judgment or a disastic sentiment, which may undermine a person’s social assessment without indicating any fact.

In addition, the offense of insult is established by openly expressing an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that may undermine the external reputation of the victim, and thus, the victim’s external reputation is not likely to be practically infringed or specificly infringed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Do9674, Oct. 13, 2016). In full view of the circumstances in the judgment, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of the instant case on the grounds that, inasmuch as the offense of insult constitutes an insulting speech by openly expressing the victim’s abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that may undermine the victim’s external reputation, and it is difficult to view it as a permissible expression under social norms.

In light of the above legal principles, the judgment of the court below is just in light of the contents and detailed method of expression of the comments of this case posted by the defendant, and the motive, circumstance, and overall purport of the comments of this case, which are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below.