The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The content of comments posted by the Defendant of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles does not constitute obscene language under Article 44-7(1)1 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc.

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

2. Determination

A. Determination on factual errors and misapprehension of the legal principles refers to the expression “obscenity” under Article 44-7(1)1 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. refers to an expression contrary to the concept of sexual morality by stimulating ordinary people’s sexual desire, and impairing normal sexual humiliation. This is not subjective expression of the producer’s sexual desire, but the expression “obscenity” under Article 44-7(1)1 of the said Act refers to an expression or expression of sexual misconduct or behavior in an explicit manner to the extent that it can be deemed that the person’s dignity and value, which is the person with the personality to be respected and protected, is seriously damaged and distorted. In light of social norms, the lower court’s determination as to whether expressive materials are obscene ought to be based on the following objective and normative evidence, such as the producer’s objective intent, information protection, and sound social norms (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Do18416, Jul. 16, 2017).

The judgment of the court below is correct.