Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, around September 2014, served as a member of the audit committee with the victim E in the special audit procedure of the Federation, with respect to the suspicion that CF would use public funds against D, the Chairperson of the Federation.

On June 30, 2015, the Defendant sent a registered mail to the executive officers other than the head of the Gyeonggi-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Council, approximately 50 branches of the GK to the name of "the name of the 15th special sense and the truth-finding" belonging to the GK branch, and the title "the false statement of the head of the E president" as the title "the head of the E president gives and receives DNA who is the subject of the special audit at the time of drinking house or special audit information at the latest time, and made a non- moral act that should not be made at the time of the auditor." The Defendant openly damaged the reputation of the victim.

3. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The lower court’s judgment should all prove that the facts constituting the elements of the offense charged in a criminal trial are the prosecutor’s burden of proof, whether the facts are subjective or objective, and thus, in the case prosecuted for the crime of defamation by publicly alleging false facts under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, the facts have been revealed, and that the alleged facts do not coincide with the objective truth, and that the Defendant knew that the alleged facts were false, and that the alleged facts were publicly known, all of them should be examined. In such a case, when determining whether the alleged facts were false, the entire purport of the alleged facts should be examined.