The defendant is a person operating D in Daejeon Dong-gu, and is a member of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of Korea.

On February 2013, the Defendant printed the “Defendant Swelter Swelter?” at the F Office located in Daejeon Dong-gu, Daejeon: “The Defendant was subject to a warning disposition on August 10, 201 at the Yusung-gu Office, and then was presented to the Ministry of Health and Welfare ( August 24, 2011),” and “I think that the Defendant would have operated the welfare center without having to meet Helter, which is the member of the 2nd Assembly.” “The Defendant would have caused the process of causing the division and confusion after the 76th Assembly,” and “The Defendant would have contributed to the establishment of the 1st Assembly, which was published by the 2nd General Assembly, for the purpose of preventing the entry of the 1st General Assembly by the Defendant to the 2nd General Assembly, and the 1st General Assembly, which was published by the 1st General Assembly, for the purpose of preventing the entry of the 2nd General Assembly.”

2. Determination

A. According to the records, it is recognized that the defendant sent a letter as stated in the above facts charged, and the facts written in the letter, such as the warning disposition by the competent Gu office or the control of members' access to the center are likely to infringe on social values or evaluation. Thus, such act of the defendant constitutes the organization of defamation against G.

B. However, if an act that defames a person by openly pointing out a fact is true and solely for the public interest, it cannot be punished pursuant to Article 310 of the Criminal Act. "When an act is about the public interest" refers to the public interest when objectively viewed the publicly alleged fact, and an actor also states the fact for the public interest, subjectively. It includes not only the public interest of the State, society, and other general public, but also the interest and interest of a specific social group or its entire members. Whether the publicly alleged fact concerns the public interest or not shall be determined by comparing and determining the degree of infringement of reputation that may be damaged or damaged by the expression, taking into account all the circumstances such as the content and nature of the publicly alleged fact, the scope of the counter-party whose publication was made, the method of expression, etc., and the degree of infringement of reputation that may be damaged or damaged by the expression, even if the major motive or purpose of the actor is for the public interest, the application of Article 310 of the Criminal Act may not be excluded (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do2746, Dec. 27, 2014).

The following circumstances acknowledged by the records of this case, namely, ① the contents of the Defendant’s writing correspond to the objective statement (the prosecutor prosecuted the contents of the facts charged as false, but applied for changes in the indictment in the statement of false facts after recognizing the facts revealed as the result of the investigation of evidence, and permitted this court). ② The public interest like the purport of the Supreme Court precedents, is also included in the interests of a particular social group or the whole of its members. However, there are problems such as the above facts charged and disputes with the members, and thus, it is deemed that the Defendant sent the above letter to the members of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Korea, ③ The act of the Defendant’s writing as stated in the facts charged and sending it to the members belonging to the Daejeon Provincial Local Council of the Daejeon Provincial Assembly of the Daejeon Provincial Council of the Daejeon Council of the Daejeon City of the Daejeon City of the Daejeon.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the court acquitted the defendant under the latter part of Article 325