Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the honor of the victim D who was the 7th East representative of the above apartment by openly pointing out facts.

2. The court below held that the defendant's act was found to have received a summary order of a fine of KRW 200,000 due to insult of the management office D, such as the fact that the defendant distributed a notice as stated in the facts charged in this case, and the contents stated in the notice. However, in light of the circumstances surrounding the distribution of the above notice, even if the defendant's act was for the purpose of undermining the persuasiveness of the defendant's assertion, the principal motive or purpose of the defendant's act was for the public interest of all residents, and thus, the illegality should be excluded pursuant to Article 310 of the Criminal Act.

3. The distribution of the notice of this case by the defendant in the summary of the grounds for appeal is not for the public interest of the whole occupants, but for the purpose of criticism against the conflict of opinion in the course of the apartment PED replacement project. Thus, it does not constitute grounds for dismissal of illegality under Article 310 of the Criminal Act.

(legal scenarios). 4. Judgment of the court of the trial

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the following facts are recognized.

1) The Defendant is the Defendant’s apartment C apartment in Gyeyang-gu, Gyeyang-gu (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

The six representative of the council of occupants' representatives shall be the same, and D shall be the same.