The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The Defendant did not make a statement to the victim of misunderstanding of facts as stated in the facts charged.

The sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

Judgment

이 사건 공소사실 피고인은 2017. 7. 4. 12:20경 서울 도봉구 마들로 749 서울북부지방법원 주차장에서 자신과 업무방해죄 공범으로 같이 재판을 받고 나온 B가 재판과정에서 공소사실을 인정하였다는 이유로 “야, 이년아, 미친 년아, 가만두지 않겠어.”라고 욕설을 하였고 이에 B와 동행한 피해자 C이 “나이도 많은 사람에게 그런 욕설을 하면 되느냐”고 나무라자, 그곳을 지나던 성명불상의 법원 민원들이 듣고 있는 가운데 피해자에게 “너는 뭐야, 씹새끼야, 제삼자는 빠져 씹쌔끼야.”, ”개새끼야, 너 같은 것 죽일 수도 있어.”라고 큰소리로 말함으로써 피해자를 공연히 모욕하였다.

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence.

The offense of insult under Article 311 of the Criminal Act is an offense of insult under Article 311 of the Criminal Act, which means a social evaluation of a person’s value, and refers to an offense of insult under Article 311 of the Criminal Act, the legal interest of which is the protection of an external reputation, and refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or sa

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Do3972 Decided November 28, 2003). However, since language is the most basic means of human expression, and each person may have different language habitss, it cannot be punished as a crime of insult under the Criminal Act on the grounds that such expression is somewhat vague and indecent.

Therefore, if any expression is not likely to undermine the social evaluation of the other party’s personal value, such expression was expressed in a somewhat exceptional and indecent manner.

Even if this is the constituent elements of the offense of insult.