The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, ① the Defendant’s insult against the victim K was able to make a bath to K in the lower judgment. However, the Defendant did not make a bath at a place where an unspecified or large number of people exists, but there is no possibility of dissemination, and there is no performance.

② The Defendant’s assault against K on July 4, 2013 committed a physical contact with K’s chest. However, the Defendant did not receive four times as indicated in this part of the facts charged, as indicated in this part of the facts charged, and the body was danced with the indication of the claim. This constitutes a justifiable act that does not go against social norms.

③ The injury to the victim B is the date and place indicated in the decision of the court below, and only the defendant has to display food waste to him/her at the place, and there is no fact that the defendant has pushed the chest of the victim B.

④ On August 29, 2013, the Defendant committed a assault against the Victim K on August 29, 2013, and the Defendant was able to stop the horses of K in the course of conducting a horse fighting with K, and was a dance, and did not assault K.

⑤ The insult of the victim L was made by the Defendant prior to the instant case, and the Defendant’s obsting of the Defendant, and the Defendant only returned to the victim in the form of a rebuttal, and there was no insult of the L.

B. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles 1) Public performance, which is the element of the offense of insult against the victim K, refers to the state in which an unspecified or multiple number of people can recognize, and the public performance was spreaded to a person individually.

Even if there is a possibility of spreading to many and unspecified persons, the requirements for performance are satisfied (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Do1007, Jul. 12, 1996). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant takes a bath to the victim K.