In addition, since the purpose of this Act is to this end, it is for the public interest, the illegality is excluded in accordance with Article 310 of the Criminal Code.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or mistake.

On the other hand, the punishment (fine 2 million won) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The Criminal Act provides a different statutory punishment depending on whether the facts stated in Articles 307 and 309 are true or false with respect to an offense relating to honor, and that if the facts are solely for the public interest, it shall not be punished. In this context, the term “actual fact” means a fact that the important part is consistent with objective facts in light of the overall purport of its contents, and even if there is a little difference from truth or somewhat exaggerated expression (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Do158, Oct. 9, 1998). 2) Comprehensively taking into account the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below: (i) under the premise that in the case of the defendant’s employment, the court below concluded a false contract with the contractor under the premise that the contractor’s consent is revoked or terminated in order to increase the performance; (ii) the director general of the higher class of the defendant, the president of the district, and the director general of the regional office, the head of the regional office, and (iii) the victim of the Plaintiff.

However, in light of the following facts, the above evidence is considered as a whole.