A. In light of the following circumstances as to the mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (defendant 1), the lower court found the Defendant guilty of each official document or attempted official document as stated in the facts charged. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. ① The articles indicated in the premise of this part of the facts charged are related to U and women of Q Group, Q Group, and individuals, such as Q Group, and the articles regarding the illegal and abnormal behavior of the Q Group, are deemed illegal and abnormal, and are not a negative article that is long-term favorable to Q Group, as it imposes social responsibility on the punishrs, and imposes pressure on the prevention of recurrence. ② Around December 18, 2015, the Defendant dialogues with Q Group T only with the head of the public relations team T or T’s personal request, and the Defendant did not appear to use the negative articles against Q Group at the time of posting the article on the ground that it was difficult to use Q Group on the ground that it was a article 17 December 17, 2015.

In addition, until February 29, 2016, T was posted 11 articles on the premise part of the facts charged that it paid 3 million won to the Defendant. If T was frighted to the Defendant’s attack, it would have to have been paid before or during the posting of the article. In light of the fact that money was paid after the posting of the article, it is difficult to deem that T was paid by means of an attack against T on December 18, 2018.

③ On January 21, 2016, the Defendant did not commit any act of attacking X, the executive director of Q Group PR team, as described in the facts charged.

The defendant, on January 2016, 201, had been said to Z-related horses in the middle of the police station X. However, X has the same Z-related horses in the National Tax Service Tax Investigation case.