The judgment below

Of the guilty parts and the not guilty parts, each of the attached list 15, 17, 18, 19-1, 20, 21 of the crime sight table.

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court rendered a judgment of innocence as to the violation of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (hereinafter “Information and Communications Network Act”) (hereinafter “Information and Communications Network Act”) and the insult of the attached Table No. 22,26, and 27 (hereinafter “crime List”) among the facts charged in the instant case, and rendered a judgment of acquittal as to the insult of each of the offenses listed in the attached Table No. 1-2, 3, 4-2, 6-2, 6-2, 7-2, 8, 9-2, 11, 12, 13, and 14, and the judgment of dismissal of prosecution as to the insult of each of the offenses listed in the attached Table No. 19-2, 23, 25, and 28.

As to the judgment below, the defendant appealed only to the guilty portion, and the prosecutor appealed only to the part of the acquittal portion under each Information and Communications Network Act (Defamation), the judgment dismissing the public prosecution and the insult portion of the acquittal portion were separated and finalized.

Therefore, the scope of adjudication on the party shall be limited to the conviction of the lower judgment and the violation of the Information and Communications Network Act (Defamation) among the facts charged in the instant case.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each notice posted on the list 19-2, 23, 25, and 28, which is the guilty portion of the judgment of the court below, does not constitute an insulting expression, and even if it constitutes an insulting expression, it does not go against social rules and is thus dismissed in accordance with Article 20 of the Criminal Act.

Nevertheless, as the court below found the above part guilty, it erred by misunderstanding of facts and misapprehending of legal principles.

B. As to the charge of violation of the Information and Communications Network Act (Defamation) among the facts charged in the instant case by the public prosecutor, it can be acknowledged that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant released was false.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty, and thus, erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

3. An ex officio determination prosecutor shall be based on 15, 17, 18, 19-1, 20, 21 among the facts charged in the instant case.