The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) the victim H constantly sees D’s members, such as making the Defendant’s obsive attack, etc., and the member of “F” told the victim H that “H “H is sof-hh-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h

Therefore, the content of the Defendant’s writing cannot be deemed as an expression that may undermine the social evaluation of the victims’ personal values. Moreover, the Defendant did not have an intent to insult, and the Defendant’s behavior was for the purpose of public interest, and was for the purpose of slandering the victims.

The judgment of the court below that found the charged facts of this case guilty is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., ① it is reasonable to view that the expression used by the defendant against the victims was generally and adversely used, and thus constitutes an insulting speech, because it expresses a warning that may undermine the social evaluation of the victims, and such expression is difficult to be deemed an act that does not contravene the social norms in light of the sound social norms, and ② it repeatedly posts the contents that may undermine the social evaluation of the victims on the reading room in which 696 members participate, regardless of the victim’s restraint.

In light of the contents of the article posted by the Defendant, it is reasonable to see that the Defendant engaged in the same conduct as the facts charged for the public interest.

It is difficult to see.