Public performance as an element of defamation, etc. refers to "a state in which many and unspecified persons can recognize it", and even if a fact was publicly known to a minority individually, performance is recognized even if the other party is likely to spread the facts publicly known to an unspecified or many unspecified persons.

In order to recognize the public performance of individual minoritiess on the grounds of the possibility of spreading them to unspecified or many unspecified persons, it is not sufficient to say that there is a high possibility of spreading them, it is necessary to high level of possibility and probability, and it requires strict certification from prosecutors.

In particular, where the other party to the statement has a private-friendly relationship, such as the speaker's or the victim's spouse, relative, or relative, there is a special circumstance to deem that the public performance is denied and that the public performance can be disseminated to many and unspecified persons regardless of such relationship.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2020Do5813, Nov. 19, 2020). According to the records, among the other party who sent the instant text messages, etc., D knows that the other party who sent the instant text messages, etc. was aware of the victim’s seat, and gave him/her a license to introduce the victim to the Defendant. At the time when 10 years have elapsed since I sent it to the victim’s friendship, I was engaged in the same type of business even though he/she was aware of the victim’s friendship, and D/I, who was closely related to the victim’s private content, thought that the content of the instant text messages, etc. was false and did not speak to the other party.

Examining the relationship between the other party D, I, and the victim as seen above in the foregoing legal doctrine in light of the foregoing factual relationship, there is a possibility of spreading a specific minority regardless of the factual background.