The part of the judgment of the first instance and the judgment of the second instance regarding conviction shall be reversed in entirety.

Defendant 6.5 million won.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles or factual errors);

A. As to the judgment of the court of first instance, the article on the victim I in the Kakao Stockholm Group (S), in which approximately 30 people participate, does not constitute insult.

B. Of the judgment of the court below, the part of the judgment of the second instance related to the insult 1) that the defendant involved in the insult 150 members of the Kakao Kakao Group (No. 1 through No. 10 of the crime list No. 2, which was involved in the victim B, does not constitute insult (No. 11 of the crime list No. 2, the court below acquitted the defendant on the ground that the defendant did not constitute insult, and the prosecutor did not appeal the part of the acquittal.

2) As to the crime of violation of the Medical Service Act, it is unreasonable to punish the Defendant as a crime of violation of the Medical Service Act in relation to the following: (a) the Defendant’s act of taking care of the side-way, blood transfusion, and mags using the general tool.

2. The judgment of the court below was rendered on the defendant's ex officio judgment (joint hearing), and the defendant appealeds on the guilty portion among the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance, and the court of first instance decided to hold a joint hearing on the two appeals. Accordingly, each offense of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is a concurrent offense relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the conviction portion among the judgment

However, despite the existence of the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles still has meaning, and this is examined below.

3. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The Defendant related to the judgment of the court of first instance also asserted the same purport as the Defendant alleged in this part, and the court of first instance did so.