Of the facts charged against the Defendant.

The defendant is the head of the C.M. D. branch.

At around 10:40 on October 16, 2012, the Defendant attended the Labor Steering Committee for the Labor Relations Management Committee at the F sixth-story Labor Relations Office located in Ansan-si, Gyeonggi-do, and the Defendant insultd the victim G and the victim, who was the chairman of the Labor Relations Committee, on the ground that he/she entrusted the personnel management office to the director of the personnel management bureau, on the ground that he/she was the victim G and the victim, who was in his/her place, in which he/she was in a dispute, during the course of his/her verbal dispute, “hick, fright, fright, hick, hick, and h h h h h h h h h, which is not raised here.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each testimony of witness G and H;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint (including attached parts);

1. Article 311 of the Criminal Act and Article 311 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of fines;

1. Penalty fine of 500,000 won to be suspended;

1. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (50,000 won per day) of the Criminal Act for the inducement of a workhouse;

1. Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 59 (1) of the suspended sentence (Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 59 (1) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc. (Article 59 (1) of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Utilization of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Utilization and Information Protection, etc.) (In cases where

A. On October 24, 2012, around 09:50 on October 24, 2012, the Defendant posted a letter of apology against the union members as to the insult of the victim G on the F bulletin board, and the facts were stated as follows: (a) for the purpose of slandering the victim, the Defendant stated that “it was confirmed that there was any fact by receiving information of the details of the personnel management authority related to the female Chairperson” for the purpose of slandering the victim, without having been entrusted to the personnel management authority.

As a result, the Defendant reveals publicly false facts through information and communications networks.