The defendant shall be innocent.

The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant, on January 2012, 201, acquitted the victim by openly insulting the victim by saying, “I would file a criminal complaint with the victim as to his/her own money borrowed from F in return for a prompt repayment of the money borrowed from F with the Defendant’s father F along with the Defendant’s his/her his/her his/her his/her his/her his/her his/her his/her husband and wife in front of Dasan-dong, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu.”

In regard to this, the Defendant asserted that the said remarks did not violate the social rules, in light of the circumstances and degree leading up to such expressions, since the victim took fraud to his/her father, and thus, he/she did not violate the social rules.

In the crime of insult as referred to in the crime of insult, the expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that may undermine the social evaluation of a person without a statement of fact is an expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment. Even in a case where a statement of opinion contains especially insulting expressions, if such expression can be deemed an act that does not contravene the social norms in light of the sound social norms of the times, illegality is exceptionally dismissed pursuant to Article 20 of the Criminal Act (Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1433 Decided July 10, 2008). According to the above facts charged, the phrase “whether the Defendant changed or changed the statement of opinion” can be deemed as an insulting speech that may undermine the social evaluation of the value of the victim’s personal value. However, according to the evidence submitted by another defendant (written indictment), it is recognized that the victim was prosecuted by deceiving the Defendant’s married F, and thus, the part of the judgment of conviction against the Defendant’s wife was not given to the victim, but at least one of the said facts charged.