Defendant shall be punished by a fine not exceeding three hundred thousand won.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one million won shall be the one day.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is in a private village of the C Burial Business in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si.

On September 29, 2018, the Defendant continued to perform a dispute with the victim about the overlapping settlement of the price of goods purchased by the victim D (the age of 24) with the view to the victim’s attitude, even though the victim’s employees and neighboring residents were observed at the time when the victim d (the age of 24), the Defendant continued to have the victim’s desire, such as “this son, this son, etc. before the fluoring fluor, fluort, fluor, fluor,” “this fluor, fluor, fluor, etc. before the fluoring fluor, fluoring fluor, and the fluoring fluor.”

Accordingly, the defendant openly insultingd the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Some of the statements made by the prosecution against the accused in the examination protocol of suspect;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Recording notes (a crime of insult is established when a person is openly insulting. The legal interest of an external reputation, which means a social evaluation of the value of a person, is to be protected, and the term “defluence” refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment which may undermine the victim’s external reputation without a statement of fact. Moreover, the offense of insult is established by openly expressing an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment which may undermine the victim’s external reputation. As such, the victim’s external reputation is not likely to be practically infringed or specific and really infringed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2016Do9674, Oct. 13, 2016; 83Do3292, Feb. 28, 1984). Defendant and defense counsel are merely a speech made to suppress the victim’s harmful act in a situation where he/she was obstructed by a serious speech or behavior of the victim at the time, and thus, it cannot be deemed as lowering the victim’s social value of the victim.