The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the offense of insulting E by misapprehending the legal principles, although the Defendant made the above remarks, the Defendant merely made a false statement to the effect that F made the Defendant a sexual indecent act against E by committing an indecent act against the Defendant, and it does not constitute a crime since F merely made the Defendant a false statement to the effect that he committed an indecent act against E, and did not have any intent to insult E.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 2.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. The offense of insult as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine is an expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that could undermine a person’s social evaluation without a statement of facts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do3972, Nov. 28, 2003). In a case where an expression was made by mixing the victim with his/her desire to destroy the victim in the presence of multiple people, the victim may be deemed to have insulting the victim.

(See Supreme Court Decision 90Do873 delivered on September 25, 1990). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated at the court below, the defendant expressed the expression that "the victim E" was met, while the victim E is present at the scene of the industrial company president, M, N, F, and the victim E in his name, and the victim E are present at the scene of this case, and the victim E was able to hear, and even at the place of seven people other than the defendant, the victim insulting the victim E by mixing the h with a abusiveous expression that contains a destructive sentiment during the victim's hearing. It shall not be deemed that the defendant insultd the victim E, and that the defendant told the F in the process of dispute with F, which is not the victim.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

3. All circumstances, including the fact that the defendant had a record of criminal punishment several times, and did not agree with the victims up to the trial of the case, including the defendant’s age, character and conduct, the background and contents leading to the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., which form the conditions of sentencing indicated in the records.