A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

At around 01:00 on August 10, 2017, the Defendant: (a) deemed the victim D, victim E, victim F, and victim G prior to the entrance of the first floor of Gangnam-gu; and (b) was under the influence of alcohol in front of the damaged entrance; (c) provided the victims with the desire to “hump, flads, f, and kids that these difficulties are unlikely to cause injury to the Republic of Korea” at the place of compliance with the above building manager and large number of traffic visitors.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of each police officer in relation to D, E, F, and G;

1. Application of the respective Acts and subordinate statutes on complaints filed in D, E, F, and G;

1. Article 311 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendant’s statement of the gist of the assertion does not constitute an insulting speech that could objectively undermine the social evaluation of the personal value of the victims.

2. The offense of insult under Article 311 of the Criminal Act is an offense that protects an external reputation, meaning a social evaluation of a person’s value, and refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment, which may undermine a person’s social evaluation without stating any fact, and if a certain expression is not likely to undermine a social evaluation of the other party’s personal value, it cannot be deemed that such expression constitutes the element of the offense of insult even if it was indicated in a somewhat unusual manner (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do229, Sept. 10, 2015). However, the Defendant’s statement, namely, “consemys,” the expression “consemys, emys,” which means that the Republic of Korea would be damaged, are the other party’s personal character.