The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Although legitimate criticism against the political person should be allowed, the court below found the defendant guilty of insult due to misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

Judgment

Contempt referred to in the crime of insult refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that may undermine people's social evaluation without mentioning a fact.

(대법원 2008. 7. 10. 선고 2008도1433 판결 참조). 원심이 적법하게 채택한 증거에 의하면, 피고인이 2014. 6. 1. 불특정 다수인이 볼 수 있는 피고인의 트위터에 접속하여 피해자 D에 관하여 “D 저건 시의원 깜도 못되는 병맛이로고. 쯧쯧. 넌 뒈져쓰”, “병신 같은 게 육성으로 빵 터지게 하네”, “D 저 병신이 내가 어제부로 선거는 끝낼라고 했는데 한마디 더하게 만드네. 니 알바들 낼 10시 5분에 다 죽여줄게 병신아. 너 코딱지 어디에 바르는지도 알아 난 븅아”, “D 니가 방구 끼는 것도 알어 난 병신아”,"D 저 병신은 결국 욕나오게 하는군아.

Sympha chronpha, Sympha

A. Recognizing the fact that a notice was posted in writing, "Haba Haba Haba," which read Haba Haba.

The above expressions used by the defendant are deemed to constitute an expression of abstract judgment or anti-defensive sentiment that may undermine the social evaluation of the victim beyond mere debate or criticism. As such, the above act of the defendant constitutes a crime of insult.

Meanwhile, even in a case where a certain article contains an insulting expression, if such expression can be seen as an act that does not contravene the social norms in light of the sound social norms of the times, illegality may be exceptionally excluded pursuant to Article 20 of the Criminal Act. However, the circumstances leading up to preparing the instant notice, specific contents of the expression, frequency and frequency of posting, etc. by the Defendant.