Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was an internal construction in the building immediately next to the “E convenience store” operated by the victim D, in his own government, to operate the mobile phone sales store, and there was a dispute between the victim and the victim due to the extension of the PVC center between the building and the road.

On April 5, 2013, at around 15:10 on the road in front of the building in question, the Defendant: (a) found the victim with F, who was her child, and obstructed the extension of the above PVC; (b) made the victim’s public speech that “I would see that I would see that I would see that I would see that I would see that I would see that I would see it?”

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D and F;

1. Partial statement of witness G;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of the video CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes

1. Article 311 of the Criminal Act and Article 311 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the argument and the defense counsel argued that the defendant made the victim speak in a manner similar to the facts stated in the crime in the judgment of the defendant, but because the defendant made such remarks at the site of the defendant, G, the victim and the victim's children at the time of making such remarks only, the crime of insult is not established due to the lack of performance.

2. The public performance in the crime of insult refers to the state in which many, unspecified or unspecified persons can recognize it. Thus, even though a certain fact about a certain person is talked about, if there is a possibility of spreading it to many, unspecified or unspecified persons, it shall meet the requirements of public performance, but if there is no possibility of spreading it differently, it shall be deemed that the public performance is lacking.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7497, Sept. 8, 2011). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the health unit and the instant court regarding the instant case.