The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant’s statement of mistake of facts does not constitute insult, the victim’s real name was not expressed, and thus, public performance cannot be recognized.

The defendant had no intention to insult.

Even though it is not so, the defendant's act in this case constitutes an act that does not violate the social norms and thus cannot be punished.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (a fine of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the assertion of mistake of facts is established when a crime of insult of a person is committed when the person is openly insulting. The legal interest of the crime of insult is an external reputation, which means a social evaluation of the person’s value, and “definite” refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or a destructive appraisal which may undermine the person’s social evaluation without a statement of facts (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do9674, Oct. 13, 2016). In light of the motive, circumstance, and method of the Defendant’s writing, the victim is the head of the tenant representative of 272 generation apartment house, the specific method of expression with the Defendant, the Defendant’s specific method of expression, the motive and method of the Defendant’s writing such phrases, and the above phrase constitutes an offense of insult of the victim’s value objectively, and it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant had an intent to insult the victim. In light of social norms or social norms, the victim’s act of insult constitutes an act that does not contravene social norms.