명예훼손
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant attended the meeting of the apartment emergency response committee at the time of the instant case, led by H and C, and raised suspicions against the victims, and the Defendant expressed that there is a problem with the intent to assist the victims, and there was no false representation as stated in the facts charged, thereby impairing the honor of the victims.
2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, ① present at the meeting of this case
G, H, and L made a statement from the investigative agency to the court of the court below that the Defendant and H “E and F, the former representative, have met the elevator construction cost and the elevator repair cost.”
In full view of the fact that the defendant made a relatively consistent and specific statement, ② the fact that the previous representative made a negative expression with H at the meeting of this case, and ③ the defendant appears to have actively raised suspicions, such as providing information on apartment broadcast, to allow residents to participate in the meeting of this case, and the defendant's assertion that only he/she provided the same in H is difficult to accept, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that he/she defames the victims by pointing out false facts as indicated in the facts charged.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (the summary of the evidence of the court below is clear that "I" is a clerical error of "L", and it is corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.