The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant sent C a cell phone text message as stated in the facts charged of this case. However, even if the defendant's appointment was not approved as the head of the Korea-U.S. Association E branch of the Association branch of Korea-U.S. Association, he was ordered to act as the head of the branch office and be expelled from the Korea-U.S. Social E branch. When the victim filed a lawsuit for confirmation of invalidity of the above expulsion, the victim sent and advertised a letter to both E branch members, one of the E branch members of the court's judgment, and used the same expression as described in the facts charged of this case, while explaining that it is unreasonable, one of the E branch members of the court's judgment, and there was no criminal intent of insult.

2. The offense of insult as referred to in the crime of insult is not a statement of fact but an expression of an abstract judgment or a sacrific sentiment that could undermine a person’s social evaluation, and the victim’s act is an insulting speech by expressing a sacrific sentiment that could damage the social evaluation of the victim, and the defendant’s criminal intent against this expression is sufficiently confirmed. Furthermore, in light of all the circumstances such as the above expression, the degree of insult contained therein, and the degree of insult that the victim could feel through such expression, the defendant’s act cannot be deemed as a justifiable act that does not violate the social rules.

As such, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[However, since the facts of the crime in the judgment of the court below are clear that the "victim" is a clerical error of "victim D (after name: F)", it shall be corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.