The instant bulletin contains the same form as the newspaper article, and the specific content that “G delivered the letter containing the Chungcheong franchise to J,” and it is sufficient for the general elector to make G candidates feel doubt as to whether they are pro-North Korean-friendly tendency, and thus, it is only a publication of fact, and is not a mere expression of opinion, criticism, or rumor.

Judgment

The court below held that, although some of the contents of the article of this case are expressions that can be seen as publication of facts, it is reasonable to view that the contents of the article of this case are merely those of publication of facts in light of the time of posting the article of this case, the contents of the article of this case , the specific facts used in the latter half of this article, and the expressions that can not be seen as criticism or rumor, and the defendant's pure opinion added to the last part, etc., and therefore, it is difficult to see that there is publication of facts in this case, and it is hard to see that there is publication of facts, and it is not sufficient evidence to acknowledge publication of facts, and thereby acquitted the article of this case.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, such judgment of the court below is justified, and there is no error of misapprehending the legal principles or of mistake of facts as alleged by the

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act for lack of reason.