A. In other words, the Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles, removed cash from the merchant’s meeting when the latter came to the merchant’s meeting.

이야기한 사실이 없고, ‘F 가 상인회장을 하면서 상인회의 돈을 떼어먹었다는 소문이 있다’ 고 이야기하였을 뿐이고, ‘F 가 조카들이 살고 있는 땅을 모두 팔아서 착복하고 조카들을 거지로 만들고 땅을 샀다’ 는 말은 H가 한 이야기이지 피고인이 한 이야기가 아니다.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty as a crime of defamation by a false representation is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In determining the credibility of a statement after the first instance court conducted the examination procedure of the witness, the first instance court’s examination of the relevant legal principles, as well as whether the content of the statement itself conforms to the rationality, logic, inconsistency, or rule of experience, or conforms to evidence or a third party’s statement, and as a result, the witness’s appearance, attitude, and penance of the statement, which is part of the witness’s statement in the open court after being sworn before a judge, shall be assessed on the credibility of the statement, by taking into account all the circumstances that are difficult to record, including the witness’s appearance, attitude, and penance of statement.

On the other hand, the appellate court's determination of credibility of the statement made by the witness in the first instance court under the current Criminal Procedure Act is based on the records including the witness examination protocol in principle. Thus, in determining credibility of the statement, there is an essential limitation that the appearance and attitude of the witness at the time of the statement that can be called one of the most important elements in determining credibility of the statement can not be reflected in the evaluation of credibility.

Considering the difference between the methods of evaluating credibility between the first instance court and the appellate court, the contents of the first instance judgment and the first instance court are legitimate.