8. On January 31, 2015, at a non-cafeteria restaurant in Incheon, the following documents were distributed to B and C, stating that “The E, F, within the D main point, shacks the Defendant, bucks, bucks, and spits the horses mixed with fingers, bucks, and bucks, which contain physical threats, bathing, and bucks,” thereby impairing the honor of victims by openly pointing out facts.

2. Determination

A. The burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction should be based on evidence with probative value that leads the judge to feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt of guilt against the defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 94Do3309, Apr. 12, 1996, etc.). (b) According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the fact that the defendant gave a copy of the document “D key situation” in the place of June 31, 2017, which read “D key situation” (hereinafter “the document of this case”).

However, in full view of the following circumstances that can be acknowledged by the above evidence, the Defendant was aware that he had been subject to the charge of assault and violence, etc. that occurred before E and promised to prevent it again, and the Defendant was affiliated with E.

G The instant document was delivered in the course of requesting assistance to B, the representative of the Incheon Council of Cooperatives (hereinafter referred to as the “Council of Cooperatives”) (hereinafter referred to as the “instant document”). In light of such circumstances, the Defendant had the intent to undermine the social evaluation of E and F, thereby leading to the instant document.

It is difficult to conclude that the defendant's intention of defamation is difficult to recognize.