A. On February 2015, 2015, the Defendant did not make a statement to D as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the lower judgment, and is not recognized as a performance.

B. Although there was a fact that the Defendant, who committed the crime of the Haman on December 2015, 2015, told F to F to the criminal record of E, it was said that F, together with E, said F, did not intend to stop the criminal record.

In addition, there is no possibility of dissemination due to the relationship with E, and the performance is not recognized.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court by the lower court on February 2015, 2015, the Defendant could fully recognize the fact that the Defendant made a statement as stated in the facts constituting the crime as stated in the lower judgment, and the possibility of spreading A. As such, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

(1) The accused and the aggrieved persons adjoining each other to maintain the city and have continued various disputes over several years, and D is the common domains of the accused and the injured persons, and have tried to arbitrate the space between the accused and the injured persons.

(2) D is not only a crime of murder but also a criminal record against the Defendant.

There is no law that prevents the victim from murder if the victim so is a bad person.

피해자를 괜히 건드려서 득 될 것이 없으니 서로 화해하라.’ 는 취지로 말한 다음, 이러한 내용을 피해자에게도 전달하여 피해자에게 피고인과 화해할 것을 종용하는 과정에서 피고인의 명예훼손 발언을 피해자에게 알리게 되었다.

(3) D In the course of transmitting conversations with the defendant to the victim, the victim shall hear the horses and the horses of the defendant and explain the contents that he/she is sufficient to the defendant in detail.