The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented by the prosecutor in the grounds for appeal, the court below acquitted the defendant of this case, which is erroneous in the misunderstanding of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is BAD’C (online pen name: D) employer.

피고인은 피해자 E(51세)을 비방할 목적으로, 2014. 12. 10. 00:29경 자신의 거주지인 성남시 분당구 F에서 컴퓨터를 이용하여 증권포털사이트인 B에 있는 G 토론실에 피해자(B 아이디 'H', 온라인필명 : I)를 지명하며 "유명한 사깃꾼, 협잡꾼

D. Along with the list of crimes committed in the annexed sheet, the victim’s reputation was damaged by the information and communications network at least six times, as in the annexed list of crimes, including revealing false facts, “a measuring arbitrariating the agreed amount by threatening B members to face at the expense of a member.”

B. The lower court determined that the crime of defamation does not necessarily require a person’s name to be explicitly indicated in order to establish the crime of defamation, and thus, if it is possible to find out which person is identified by considering the content of a false statement without a person’s name comprehensively and comprehensively, it constitutes defamation against a specific person (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do1226, Mar. 27, 2014). However, in cases where only the victim’s Internet ID can be known, and even if considering other surrounding circumstances, it is difficult to find out who is the victim of such Internet ID and no other evidence exists, if the victim cannot be deemed to have been identified as the victim of the crime of defamation or insult, which protects the external reputation, and thus, the crime of defamation against a specific person is not established.