A. In light of the level of expression and the method of publishing the purport of the expression contained in the written purport of misunderstanding of facts, etc., the purpose of the Defendant’s preparing the purport of this case cannot be deemed to be solely for the public interest, and even if the purpose of the defamation is fully recognized, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s act solely for the public interest and was dismissed by deeming that there was no purpose of slandering, the lower court erred

B. Of the contents of the Defendant’s text of the misapprehension of the legal doctrine, “the dispatched employee is the Secretary General or the office chief of the Federation who has been dispatched to the Director General of the Federation.” In addition, the part of “I direct the Director General and the director of the Branch to be dismissed unless the latter is followed by the instructions of the Federation,” and “I direct the Director General and the director of the Branch to watch well well” (hereinafter “the expression of this case”) constitutes a public allegation of false facts, and its illegality cannot be avoided.

However, the court below's determination on this issue is unlawful, since the expression in this case was viewed factually and the illegality thereof was eliminated.

2. Determination

A. In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the records of this case, it is justified that the court below's determination that the contents of the defendant's explanation are solely related to the public interest and it cannot be deemed that there is a purpose of slandering D against D, for the reasons as stated in its reasoning, the illegality of the judgment is dismissed. There is no illegality of mistake of facts, such as the prosecutor's assertion.

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument of mistake is without merit.

B. As to the facts charged by a prosecutor of the misapprehension of the legal principle as to the factual defamation under Article 307(1) of the Criminal Act, the court’s indictment without changing the indictment.