Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

The defendant was a person who worked as an employee of the victim E in the victim's remaining sugar in Ulsan-gu C, Ulsan-gu, and the victim was a person entrusted with the right to operate the boome and the store.

1. Defamation;

가. 2013. 4. 18.자 범행 피고인은 2013. 4. 18.경 부산 남구 용호동 일대에서 피해자의 종업원으로 위 사우나에서 일하고 있는 F에게 전화를 걸어 F에게, "나는 E에게 월급도 받지 못하였다. E은 온 동네방네 슈퍼와 술집에 외상값이 쫙 깔려있다, 그 사람은 사기꾼이기 때문에 신빙성이 없다, 당신도 내 꼴 나기 전에 그만둬라"라는 취지로 말하였다.

However, even though there was a dispute over monthly pay between the defendant and the victim, there was no fact that the victim did not give monthly pay to the defendant, there was no credit payment that was not paid to the defendant, and the victim did not pay to the others. As to whether the victim committed the fraud against others, there was no criminal defendant.

In the end, the Defendant damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts against the victim to F.

B. Around April 19, 2013, the Defendant, who committed the crime of April 19, 2013, posted a telephone to F and carried out funeral services to F, “F drive E, and take over a store inside the house and take over, from that time, to do so, and at that time, E is a franch for which it is impossible to believe due to the change of fraud, and B was filed with the Ministry of Labor with the Ministry of Labor because it did not receive a monthly wage rate, and E was franched within the upper limit of the day, and E was in conflict with the president or the president, and thus, it was said that it was prompt from E before deeming it to have been damaged.”

However, although there was a dispute over monthly pay between the defendant and the victim, there was no fact that there was no monthly pay, and there was no reason to see whether the defendant committed fraud against others.

In the end, it is eventually.