Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Examining the evidence in light of the records, a thorough examination of the records of this case is insufficient to acknowledge that the defendant's writing as to the facts charged in this case on the Internet bulletin board of D'VOC (customer's sound) with the evidence submitted by the prosecutor for the reasons stated in its holding, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no evidence to prove a crime, and thus, the judgment of innocence is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Furthermore, for the purpose of not punishing 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 is also required to indicate the fact for the public interest, and not only the publicly alleged fact is true or, at least, there are reasonable grounds to believe the fact to be true, or to believe the fact to be true. In this context, the term “actual fact” means the fact that the important part is consistent with objective facts in light of the overall purport of the content thereof, and it is nothing more than a little difference from truth or somewhat exaggerated expression in detail, and further, the term “public interest” is widely related to the interests of the State, society, and other general public as well as to the interest and interest of a particular social group or its entire members.