A. Prosecutor 1) In relation to the part found not guilty in the lower court of mistake of facts, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on all of the charges of defamation on November 1, 2012 and partial defamation on November 11, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “the part of the lower court’s judgment that found the Defendant not guilty, despite its consistent assertion that E had consistently argued from the Defendant that “the Defendant made the Defendant make the same speech as what was written in the facts charged,” the overall purport of the record between E and J, and the overall purport of the record between E, and the circumstances at the time when the Defendant made such remarks.”

B. Defendant 1) In relation to the erroneous determination of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the convicted portion of the judgment below, the Defendant did not call to G and H as “Irgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrg

2. Determination

A. We examine the prosecutor's argument of mistake of facts, and the circumstances that the court below properly explained and the victim E appears to be not good for the defendant who left F in relation to the Diplomatic F, and thus, he made a statement of E.