The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant does not steals another’s money so in the victim’s Kakao Scarto.

쇠도요

“....” “ Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don

The court below acquitted the defendant, although the expression " " constitutes an expression that represents as if the victim was a crime of larceny, fraud, or embezzlement, and constitutes an expression that represents an abstract expression that may undermine the social evaluation of the victim, or an sacrific sentiment, by describing as if the victim was a crime of property, such as theft, fraud, or embezzlement. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The offense of insult under Article 311 of the Criminal Act is a crime that legally protects an external reputation, which means a social evaluation of human value. The offense of insult referred to in the offense of insult refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment which could undermine people’s social evaluation without mentioning facts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Do739, May 12, 1987; 2003Do3972, Nov. 28, 2003). (B) According to evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant requested a refund of money upon requesting the victim to purchase film tickets on behalf of the Republic of Korea, and the victim requested a refund of money after sending the money to the victim. The victim unilaterally deducted the remainder of KRW 200 on the ground that he/she required his/her own data on the film list search, etc. without notifying in advance, and the Defendant continued to be subject to the victim’s contact with the victim and the victim’s request to return the above 20 billion.

According to the above facts of recognition, the expression of the facts charged is the return of money to the victim.