Since the statement in this case is based on the theory of prosecution based on the defendant's coverage, it cannot be viewed as the publication of "facts".

② The instant remarks were based on various grounds, and thus do not constitute “false facts.”

(3) Even if the fact publicly announced by the defendant is false, there are reasonable grounds to believe such fact is true.

④ Although the Defendant did not intend to prevent a candidate from being elected, the lower court’s judgment is contrary to the actual purpose of the election and relevant legal principles.

The punishment (fine 7 million won) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

Judgment

A. With regard to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the court below rejected the above assertion by giving detailed explanation of the defendant's assertion and its determination under the title "the judgment on the defendant and his defense counsel" in the above appeal grounds ①, ③, and ④. In light of the evidence and legal principles duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the above determination by the court below is just, and the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

In order to establish the crime of publishing false facts under Article 250 (2) of the Public Official Election Act, it is necessary for the prosecutor to actively prove that the public prosecutor's publication of false facts is false, and the crime of publishing false facts cannot be established only with the absence of proof that the public announcement is true. However, a person who actively asserts that there is no suspicion against a person who asserts that there was no suspicion in the crime of publishing false facts, shall be alleged to have been doubtful.