The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant written comments as stated in the facts charged, but the victim’s husband’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s name

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misunderstanding the fact of conviction.

2. The Defendant also asserted the same argument in the lower court, and the lower court convicted the Defendant on the grounds that the relevant article that the Defendant written comments on the Defendant’s assertion was a woman from the victim’s real name, but the victim was a woman from the victim’s h core video without the victim’s real name, as indicated in its reasoning, and that the Defendant could easily find out that the above video is the victim and the other party indicated in the comments with the person from the above article is the victim.

In a thorough examination of the records of this case, the above judgment of the court below is just and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts alleged by the defendant or by misunderstanding the legal principles.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.