The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts) is sufficiently recognized that the defendant insultd the victim as stated in the facts charged.

2. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, around March 23, 2015, under investigation by the Criminal Team at the Yangju Police Station, and investigation by the Criminal Team at the Yangju Police Station on the main and separate premises, he/she is under investigation by the criminal charge for intimidation of the victim C, and “this person shall be sent to the mental hospital for the patient with mental illness.”

"Publicly insultingly insulting the victim."

3. The lower court’s judgment held that the Defendant’s remarks may have been disseminated to many and unspecified persons, considering the following circumstances: “The investigation at the scene at the time and the investigation at the two police stations at the time and the investigation at the two teams, and only the victims of E, F, G, H, and H, a police officer other than the head of the two teams teams at the time, and the above police officers are public officials engaged in investigation who have a duty to keep confidentiality and are in an official duty that may expect that the Defendant would not transmit without permission the details

In such circumstances, it is difficult to see that the defendant's speech is likely to spread, i.e., public performance, barring special circumstances, and thus, acquitted.

4. Determination on whether a deliberation was made

A. Performance, which is the element of the crime of defamation, refers to the state in which an unspecified person or a large number of people can be recognized, and even if one person expresses a fact, if there is a possibility of spreading it to an unspecified person or an unspecified person, it shall meet the requirements of performance, but if there is no possibility of spreading it differently, it shall be deemed a lack of performance, and the same applies to performance, which is the element of the crime of insult (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 83Do49, Apr. 10, 1984; 2008Do2090, Apr. 24, 2008). Meanwhile, the performance of the crime of defamation or insult is recognized on the ground of the possibility of dissemination as above.