The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant is that the defendant did not take a bath at the platform under the ruling of the court below, but does not do so.

Even if the Defendant’s expression may be somewhat rare, but it is not likely to undermine the social evaluation of the other party’s personal value, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the lower judgment (1) of the instant facts charged are as follows: (a) around November 17:20, 2015, on the grounds that the Defendant demanded from the subway 2 line D station platform located in Seongdong-gu Seoul, Seongdong-gu, Seoul to re-transfer the victim E to the original location of the Defendant from the subway 2 line D station platform, which belongs to the security hall affiliated with Seongdong-gu, Seoul to the Seoul Twit, the Defendant demanded the victim to re-transfer from the original location of the Defendant; (b) in the face of the number of passengers, the victim’s age is similar to the Defendant’s “nanibibibibs age.”

(2) On this basis, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the following grounds: (i) the Defendant’s partial statement, (ii) the police statement regarding E, and (iii) the written accusation as evidence

B. In the instant case claiming that the Defendant only denied the facts charged from the police to the trial of the party, and without any objective evidence to prove the facts charged, the Defendant’s statement cannot be said to be easily credibility, in light of the following: (a) there is no objective evidence to prove the facts charged; (b) the Defendant was to submit subway video data to the police that could recognize the insulting facts in the platform; (c) there is no evidence to prove the insulting facts in the platform; and (d) the Defendant stated that he would submit data about the insulting facts in the platform; and (d) there is no evidence to prove the insulting facts in the platform; and (e) the Defendant stated that he will submit data about the insulting facts in the service room.