D The head of the Gu and the denying E decided not to be a member of our church since they did not go through the resolution of the party meeting at the time of attendance.

by publicly announcing “The honor of the victim E was damaged by openly pointing out a fact.”

2. Determination

A. In order for a crime of defamation of relevant legal principles to be established, it is required to engage in an act of indicating specific facts sufficient to undermine a person’s social evaluation with intent to defame other persons as a subjective element (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2018Do4200, Jun. 15, 2018). The alleged facts should thereby be the body of a specific person to the extent that it may infringe on a person’s social value or evaluation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Do15628, Dec. 5, 2017). In addition, if an expression of value neutrality was used, the social value or evaluation of a specific person was reduced due to the use of the expression of value neutrality in light of social norms.

If it cannot be seen, the crime of defamation is not established (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do6728, Nov. 27, 2008). Meanwhile, in order to recognize liability for defamation with respect to the posting of a third party’s expression, the posting person’s own act should be subject to a legal evaluation in accordance with the principle of self-responsibility under the Constitution. If the posting of a third party’s expression is merely citing or introducing the expression as a whole, the liability for defamation is denied (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Order 2009HunMa747, Dec. 26, 2013). (b) In case of a case, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court are examined in light of the above legal principles.