Part of acquittal shall be reversed.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, defamation is acquitted.

A. The defendant (misunderstanding of facts as to the part of the crime) merely stated that the N, who is the head of the apartment management office of this case, would not have a false confirmation of facts, and there is no threat to the victims who are apartment residents, and it is not a domestic affairs.

Even if it is merely a temporary presentation of appraisal, and the victims did not feel fear, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and thereby finding the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor including the prosecutor F’s consistent statement from the victim F’s investigative agency to the court, E, etc., the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and acquitted the Defendant, even though it could sufficiently recognize the facts of defamation among the facts charged in the instant case.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion

A. The prosecutor changes the indictment at the trial of the party below with regard to defamation for which the verdict of innocence was pronounced at the court below, following the changes in the date, time, and place of the crime, and the reduction in the horses.

As stated in the paragraph, the application for changes in indictment was filed, and this court permitted this, and the judgment of the court below was changed to this part, so the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

However, the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still included within the scope of the revised charges, so this part of the prosecutor's argument is included within the scope of the trial.

subsection (1) shall be deemed to be applicable.

B. The facts charged by the Defendant, around July 2007, at the events located in the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government apartment complex, did not have used the repair money for personal purposes by the victim FF voluntarily from the Construction Mutual Aid Association. Although there was no fact that the apartment parking lot was leased to the outside party, while the apartment resident, the husband of E and E, and the senior mother’s husband are heard, the 603 construction mutual aid association should voluntarily repair money.