The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu District Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The offense of insult under Article 311 of the Criminal Act is an offense, the legal interest of which is protected by the law, which means a social evaluation of a person’s value, and refers to an offense of insult as referred to in the offense of insult, and an expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment, which is likely to undermine a person’

Therefore, if any expression is not likely to undermine the social evaluation of the other party’s personal value, such expression was expressed in a somewhat intangible manner.

Even if this does not constitute the elements of insult, it cannot be deemed as constituting the crime of insult.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2015Do2229 Decided September 10, 2015; Supreme Court Decision 2017Do2661 Decided November 29, 2018, etc.).2. A.

The judgment below

The reasoning and the evidence duly admitted by the court below reveal the following facts.

1) On January 2016, while the Defendant was operating a beauty room under the trade name of "C," the first floor of the building located in Daegu Jung-gu, Daegu-gu, and operated the beauty room, around May 2016, the Defendant argued about the issue of the use of the said building toilets, etc. (2) around August 2017, the Defendant manufactured 50 copies of the beauty room promotional log, including the content of "C Director," around August 2017, and distributed 100 copies to local residents around that time, and attached 15 copies to the above beauty room.

B. Examining such factual relations with the Defendant and building owner’s relation, the background leading up to the Defendant’s preparation of the leaflet containing the foregoing expressions, the meaning and overall context of the expression “A”, the method of expression and the conditions before and after, in light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the expression used by the Defendant was expressed in a somewhat exceptional manner that may displeasure the other party, but is an insulting speech that may objectively undermine social evaluation of the value of a building owner’s personality.