The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be acquitted respectively.

With regard to the summary of the grounds for appeal (guilty or misunderstanding of legal principles), even though the defendant did not display a beer's disease and did not intend to threaten the victim F due to beer's disease, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, by misunderstanding the facts.

Even though the Defendant expressed a abusive speech to the police officer who is the victim, it cannot be recognized as a public performance, which is the constituent element of the crime of insult, because the Defendant expressed a abusive speech at a place where only the victim and the police officers who are the police officers, who are the victims. Therefore, the judgment below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or by

Judgment

A. A. A summary of the facts charged 1) Around 05:50 on February 1, 2014, the Defendant: (a) under the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. (collective, deadly weapons, etc.) the Defendant threatened the victim, i.e., a police officer of the G district, who was sent after having received 112 a report, with the victim’s question about the circumstances of the instant case from the victim H, a police officer of the G district G district, and the victim, “I am out of the dispute,” and “I am in the same manner as I am in the victim’s head,” and expressed the victim’s desire to “I am out of the dispute, I am out of the dispute.”

B. Determination 1) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the victim F, who judged the facts charged in the injury by a group of deadly weapons, etc., stated in the investigative agency that the defendant had been a beer soldier, and in this court, this Court stated.