The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses of the trial shall be borne by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant, as stated in the lower judgment, deleted the comments on the comments (hereinafter “instant comments”) written in three minutes, the lower court posted a 13-hour notice.

The decision was determined.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles, posted the comments on the instant comments, was deleted immediately after the Defendant posted the instant comments, and the time when the comments on the instant comments were posted is the new wall time time time for the visitors with little number of visitors, the lower court acknowledged the performance of the comments on the instant case, even though the performance is not recognized.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the victim E states to the effect that "the comments of this case were posted from 2:0 to 15:00 (the second page of the evidence record)" in the investigative agency, that "J, a member of the carpet, engaged in the comments of this case at the investigative agency at the time of the first instance trial (the third page of the evidence record)" (the third page of the evidence record), and that "the comments of this case after the after the aftermathing of a house," and the court of the court of the court of the court below also stated to the same effect that "the victim E expressed the comments of this case from 02:05 to 15:00" (the fourth page of the trial record of this case) and stated to the effect that "the victim E was posted from 02:05 to 15:00 on the day of the ruling of this case."

Therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit (B) and as long as the performance of the comments of this case is recognized as a public performance of the comments of this case as seen in the following B., the Defendant’s assertion that the comments of this case, like the Defendant’s assertion, was posted for three minutes.

However, such circumstance does not affect the establishment of a crime. B. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of the legal doctrine, the term “public performance” in the crime of insult refers to the state in which the relevant speech is recognizable to an unspecified person or a large number of people (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 83Do49, Apr. 10, 1984), and a third party can recognize it at the time of display.