Around December 1, 2014, the Defendant sent a text message to the senior citizens of the city with a cell phone from Busan (hereinafter referred to as the “Musan”) around December 1, 2014, stating that the Defendant: (a) sent to the senior citizens of the city with a 31,000 won disbursement of the 4 senior citizens who did not know of the members; (b) the Chairperson on November 15, 190; and (c) 25,000 won of the ducks; and (d) 16 November 10, 200; and (b) embezzled the senior citizens’ funds by sending the text message three times in total as indicated in the attached list of crimes; and (c) the prosecutor, from around that time until the 20th day of the same month, embezzled the victim’s funds. Since Article 307(1) of the Criminal Act is the concept of “an opinion” with the content of value judgment or assessment; and (d) the crime of defamation under Article 307(1) of the Criminal Act was established with a false statement or false facts.

The honor of the victim was damaged by setting forth B.

2. Determination

A. In order not to punish an act that defames a person by openly pointing out a fact, the publicly alleged fact is related to the public interest in view of the objective fact, and the actor should have engaged in such act for the public interest, and there should be reasonable grounds to believe that the alleged fact is true or that at least the actor believed that it is true, and that there should be reasonable grounds to believe that it is true.

Here, the term “definite fact” refers to that.