If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

The defendant was a person who served as the chairperson of the council of occupants' representatives of the window of Changwon-si, and the victim D is an occupant of the above apartment.

The defendant, from September 6, 2013 to the 17th day of the same month, was given a prior notice of a fine for negligence to 36 places in total, including 18 bulletin boards and 18 elevators of each of the above apartment buildings, and 18 units of the above apartment buildings, even though the victim did not have filed a civil petition against the chairperson of the representative meeting by visiting the Gu office or making telephone calls to the Gu office and imposing an administrative fine on the chairperson of the representative meeting, it is the fact that the defendant inevitably received a prior notice of a fine for negligence, in the sense that two persons of 103 Dong D (referring to the victim) and 104 Dong E are found several times in the Gu office, or that there is no objection to the representative meeting by telephone, and that they would not be punished by the chairperson of the representative meeting

If a fine for negligence is imposed due to such unsound force, I do not know where there is any such a fluorous force. It is not so much fluoring about where the same force remains the same representative.

Two copies of printed articles containing false information have been posted.

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of the witness F in the court;

1. Partial statement of the police interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. A complaint (including attached documents);

1. The reference inquiry report;

1. The application of statutes to each investigation report (the attachment of materials by a complainant, the construction of a counter office, and the relative verification of a public official in charge);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 307 (2) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of penalties;

2. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse.

3. The defendant and his defense counsel regarding the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order. The contents of the inducement of this case are all true, and the posting of the inducement of this case by the defendant at the time is public.