We reverse the judgment of the court below.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. In relation to the judgment of the second instance court, the Defendant did not put any text identical to the No. 1 of the crime sight table No. 2, and posted the same article as No. 2 or No. 4, but it did not insult the victim G. 2) In relation to the judgment of the third instance, the Defendant did not put the same article as the No. 1 of the crime sight table No. 2, but puts the same article as the No. 2, but it was not the victimJ but the victimJ, and it was referred to B. However, it did not constitute an insulting expression against the victimJ.

3) As to the judgment of the court below in Article 6, the defendant did not put this writing on the list of crimes, and the victim B fabricated as if the defendant had written his writing. Therefore, the judgment of the court below convicting this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts. (B) The judgment of the court below is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts. The punishment (the first instance court: the fine of two million won; the fine of one million won; the second court below; the fine of one million won; the third court court below: the fine of one million won; the fine of one million won; the fourth court below; the fine of two million won; the fine of two million won; the fifth court below; the fine of two million won; the fine of two million won; and the fine of two million won: the court below of the court below; the fine of two million won.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the judgment of the court below 1 through 6 against the defendant was rendered, and the defendant filed an appeal against them, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings of each of the above appeal cases. Since each of the crimes of the court below 1 through 6 against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment should be imposed in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, and thus, the judgment of the court below 1 through 6 cannot be maintained as it is.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, which is examined in the following paragraphs.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The judgment of the court below on the second ground.