The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

A. According to the evidence of this case, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged, even though the defendant sufficiently recognized the facts alleged in D as stated in this part of the facts charged, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The suspended sentence of a fine of KRW 300,00,000 imposed by the court below on the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant, around September 2017, in the facts charged, destroyed the victim’s reputation by openly stating that “B went to the friendship and her age from the last three-way direction, used full force in the age, and attempted rape against a female who was only at the age. A female complaint was filed in the crime of rape, and “B is not in the detention house; hereinafter referred to as “B will come to the school on the part of a person who was aware of it.”

B. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that it is difficult to recognize that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was the same as this part of the facts charged, in light of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, which are revealed by the records of this case, since D’s written statement preparation process or statement at the time of the victim’s request, it is difficult to eliminate

C. The judgment of this court 1 but the following facts duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., ① D consistently testified from the defendant to the investigation agency to the court of the court below that it was the same as this part of the facts charged; ② its statement is replaced by a specific fact; ② the defendant was also seated as D from the bus "on October 25, 2018 and January 9, 2019"; and ② it is asked whether D was h was hicked with the victim B.