The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant does not have any misunderstanding of facts against G and H at the date, time, place, etc. of the judgment of the court below.

Nevertheless, since the court below pronounced guilty of the facts charged in this case, it erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (three million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the statutory penalty for the offense of insult is either imprisonment with prison labor for not more than one year or a fine not exceeding two million won. However, although the lower court deemed the Defendant’s G and H as a crime of insult, and selected a fine, the lower court sentenced the Defendant to a fine of three million won who escaped from the upper limit of the above statutory penalty, and thus, the lower judgment was no longer maintained in this respect.

However, despite the above reasons for reversal of facts, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this will be examined below.

B. Considering the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a witness’s statement in light of the spirit of the principle of substantial direct examination adopted by the relevant legal principle as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the first instance court’s determination as to the credibility of the witness’s statement in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court is clearly erroneous, or the first instance court’s determination as to the credibility of the witness’s statement in light of the results of the first instance court’s examination and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court is clearly erroneous, or the first instance court’s determination as to the credibility of the witness’s statement in the first instance court is clearly unfair, except in exceptional cases where the first instance court’s determination as to the credibility