The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant was only the Defendant and the victim in the career room at the time of the Defendant’s abusiveing of the victim, and cannot be deemed to have satisfied the requirements of performing the offense of insult. 2) The Defendant transmitted the same content as the facts charged in order to clarify the case that occurred between the victim and the victim, and there was no intention to commit defamation.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s duly admitted and examined the allegation on the charge of insult, determination of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine, the Defendant’s assertion on the charge of insult is recognized as satisfying the requirements for performance in the crime of insult. Therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit. ① The victim appeared in the lower court as a witness in the court and testified that “five students and F teachers were insulting. Although there was only the victim and the Defendant in the career room, the Defendant was able to satisfe the students, but the Defendant had satisfe the students at the career room.” ② The Defendant also recognized that five students were in the career room in the investigative agency, and the voice of the Defendant was much more than the victim’s voice. Accordingly, according to the sound recording CD, it appears that the Defendant’s voice was able to hear the Defendant’s abusive opinion even if there were students outside the career room. ③ The Defendant testified in the presence of the witness in the court below, and then, the Defendant testified the victim’s testimony on the part of defamation.