The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant’s misapprehension of the legal doctrine stated in the facts charged in the instant case, it is merely an expression that merely expressed the victim’s emotions during the process of resisting the victim’s infinite behavior, it constitutes an act that does not constitute insult under the Criminal Act or that does not contravene social rules.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of legal principles as to the assertion of insult 1) The offense of insult as referred to in the crime of insult is an expression of abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that could undermine the people’s social assessment without mentioning the facts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do4408, Apr. 24, 2008; 2008Do9209, Oct. 14, 2010). The Defendant said, at the office of the law firm where the victim is working, that “the victim is without a lawyer’s qualification,” and “the victim’s act should be deemed as constituting a reasonable act of infringement of the victim’s social interests or interests, as it does not merely indicate the contents and method of the above expression, and the degree of the insulting appraisal that the victim could feel, and thus, the Defendant’s act should be deemed as a reasonable act of infringement of the victim’s interests or interests, and thus, it should be deemed as a reasonable act of infringement of the victim’s interests or interests.