The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (based on factual errors and misapprehension of legal principles) specifically expressed the victims, and the degree of such criticism was merely low and exceptional, thereby resulting in social evaluation of the victims’ personal value. Therefore, the offense of insult is established.

2. Determination

A. 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 under Article 311 of the Criminal Act, namely, the expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment, which does not indicate a fact,

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Do3972 Decided November 28, 2003). However, since language is the most basic means of human expression, and each person may have different language habitss, it cannot be punished as a crime of insult under the Criminal Act on the grounds that such expression is somewhat vague and indecent.

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 exceptional and indecent manner.

Even if this constitutes an element of the offense of insult, it shall not be deemed to constitute an element of insult.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2015Do6622 Decided December 24, 2015). B.

The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged on the ground that it is difficult to view that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was an intentional act to insult the victims and that there was no other evidence to acknowledge it.

In addition to the various circumstances described by the court below in detail, the purpose of the assembly reported by the defendant, the circumstances leading to the statement of the facts charged, the meaning of the statement, and the whole context of the statement.