1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the Defendant’s ground of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court was justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of defamation among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by failing

Meanwhile, although the Defendant submitted a petition of appeal to the effect that he/she is dissatisfied with the remainder of conviction among the judgment below, there is no indication of the grounds for objection in the petition of appeal and appellate brief.

2. As to the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, regarding the violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. with respect to the victim D among the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court presumed that the Defendant’s act of delivering the voice message to D is reasonable on the premise that the Defendant’s act of causing fears or fears of fears by using the Defendant’s voice message to the investigation agency, regardless of its content’s fears or fears, is merely one of the following: (a) the Defendant sent eight times from November 11, 2009 to November 14, 2009, and the voice message sent two times from November 14, 2009 to 0:42 of the same day, and (b) the Defendant’s act of causing fears or apprehensions to the investigation agency, in light of the following premise: (b) the Defendant’s act of making the voice message sent to D more than 10 minutes of fears or fears; and (c) thus, (d) the Defendant’s act of fears fears fear or fears.