A. On 03. 09:13. 09:13., the Defendant sent an anonymous letter to the male-friendly group of the victim by special grade mail stating that “The Defendant has no career of Hassky, Hasky, Hasky, Hasky, Hasky, Hasky, Hasky, Hasky, Hasky, Hasky, Hasky, Hasky, Hasky, Hasky, Haskysn.”

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

B. The Defendant around November 2017, at the above post office, and the facts are complicated for the victim’s male relationship.

Although there is no basis to regard that a person was abortion or abortion, the father of the same male-child family council sent to the father of the same male-child family council by ordinary mail a anonymous letter to the effect that “riter is abortion, and a male-child relationship is complicated. He knows that he may not know that he was fry, and that he reads in the mind that he did not fit.”

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

2. Determination

A. The public performance, which is the constituent element of the crime of defamation, refers to the state in which many, unspecified or unspecified persons can be recognized, and even if a fact was distributed to one person individually, if there is a possibility of spreading it to many, unspecified or unspecified persons, it shall meet the requirements of public performance, but if there is no possibility of spreading it to others, the public performance shall not be

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Do4579 delivered on February 11, 2000, etc.). Meanwhile, in a case where the public performance of defamation is acknowledged on the grounds of the possibility of dissemination, at least dolusence is required as a subjective element of the constituent elements of the crime, and thus, the perpetrator must have the intent not only to recognize the possibility of dissemination, but also to allow the risk. Whether the perpetrator is allowing the possibility of dissemination is determined.