The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although it is true that the defendant used a somewhat small expression by misunderstanding the legal principles, in light of the victim's status and past behavior, it shall be deemed that the illegality of the defendant's act is excluded by Article 20 of the Criminal Act as an act that does not violate social rules.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, insult as referred to in the crime of insult does not indicate facts and expresses an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that may undermine people’s social evaluation. Even in cases where a certain article contains such insulting expressions, in light of the motive, circumstance, and background behind posting the article, the overall purport of the article, specific method of expression, the logical and objective objective of the premiseed fact, the degree of such insulting expressions in the whole text, and the overall relation between the whole contents of the article and the fact that are objectively reasonable, the relevant opinion should be given on the premise that the article is objectively reasonable, and if it is merely a part of insulting expressions used in the process of emphasizing that one’s own judgment and opinion are reasonable, it should be readily accepted by Article 20 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do478, Nov. 28, 2003; Supreme Court Decision 2008Do3278, Apr. 28, 2002).