The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (based on factual errors or misapprehension of legal principles) refers to “an organization in which a good school, students’ or parents’ group (hereinafter “the instant parents’ group”) is called as “organization engaged in ideologically political activities in good school” (hereinafter “the instant parents’ group”) while preparing articles under the title of “E” and reporting them on the homepage C, and insultingly expressing abstract judgments that may hinder social evaluation of its members, and such expressions do not constitute a justifiable act that does not violate the social rules.

Therefore, even if the facts charged in the instant case can be fully convicted, the lower court acquitted the Defendant by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the crime of insult or a justifiable act.

2. The offense of insult as referred to in the crime of insult is an expression of an abstract judgment or a sacrific sentiment, which does not indicate a fact, and even in a case where an expression of opinion includes especially insulting expressions, when such expression can be deemed an act that does not contravene social norms in light of the sound social norms of the age, illegality is exceptionally dismissed pursuant to Article 20 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1433, Jul. 10, 2008). Considering the evidence submitted by the prosecutor in light of the above legal principles, the court below should consider the motive or circumstance behind posting the article as indicated in the judgment of the court below, the overall purport of the article, specific method of expression, the expression “an organization in which anti-competantism is a political activity that enables the parents’ association to build a political group in the future,” and its overall contents and relation.