The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error, misunderstanding of legal principles)

A. As to the violation of each Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (hereinafter “Information and Communications Network Act”) (hereinafter “Information and Communications Network Act”), the Defendant: (a) notified the victim’s assertion that there is no ground for the victim’s assertion; or (b) notified that there is no ground for the victim’s assertion; or (c) sent a notice related to the violation of Information and Communications Network Act (defluence) in a series of cases arising from a religious debate (i.e., criticism of the victim’s behavior (i., July 1, 2017; (iv) September 28, 2017; (v) October 18, 2017; and (v) October 27, 2017; and (v) posted a notice related to the violation of Information and Communications Network Act (defluence) on October 27, 2017).

Therefore, it cannot be deemed that there was a purpose of slandering the defendant, and even if it is not, such act constitutes a justifiable act because it does not violate the social norms.

B. As to the insult, this part of the expressive act was committed for the purpose of criticizeing the behavior of a victim interfering with a religious expressive act by improper means, and in light of the motive, circumstance, contents, etc. of the writing, it constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate the social norms and constitutes a justifiable act.

2. Determination

A. (1) Determination of the violation of each Act on Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Network Utilization and Information Protection (Defamation) requires the intention or purpose of a harm, and whether a person is purposely to defame a person is to determine the degree of infringement of reputation that may be damaged or damaged by the expression, taking into account all the circumstances about the expression itself, such as the content and nature of the relevant statement, the scope of the other party to whom the relevant fact was published, and the method of expression, etc., as well as the degree of infringement of reputation that may be damaged or damaged by the expression.