The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

A. Although the Defendant made a statement to the effect that “the victim recognized the charge of child abuse and voluntarily withdrawn from the C” (hereinafter “instant statement”), the Defendant’s defense counsel’s defense counsel on September 4, 2019 alleged that there was no fact that the Defendant made a statement as stated in the instant facts charged, but the said part of the argument was withdrawn in the summary of the pleading on February 3, 2020.

The above content is true, and the defendant did not have the intention of defamation, and even if the above content is not true, there was considerable reason to believe that the defendant believed that the above content was true, and the defendant made the instant statement for the public interest, so the illegality is dismissed in accordance with Article 310 of the Criminal Act.

In addition, since the defendant delivered the above contents to H only, there is no performance.

B. As the statement on May 8, 2019, on which the Defendant submitted the statement of reasons for appeal of unfair sentencing, stating that he/she seeks a prior action, it shall be deemed that the assertion of unfair sentencing is also included.

The punishment of the lower court (one million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The prosecutor must prove that the facts alleged in the crime of defamation by publicly alleging false facts under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act are not consistent with the objective truth and thus false.

However, it is not possible for a prosecutor to prove the absence of a fact that has not been specified in a certain period and space, but it is more easy to prove the existence of the fact, so such circumstance shall be considered in determining whether the prosecutor fulfilled the above burden of proof.

Therefore, a person who asserts that he/she did not have any suspicion is subject to suspicion.