First of all, the purport of the language and text posted by the defendant in relation to the part that used part of the cost of operating and maintaining food for the personal purpose is that the victim has used part of the cost of operating and maintaining food, and it does not bring about KRW 70,000,00 to the victim, and as long as 70,000 won has been paid to the victim as the cost of operating and maintaining food, the content of the article posted by the defendant in relation to the above part constitutes false facts, and as long as it constitutes false facts as above, there is no room to perceive illegality. ② Next, in relation to the part that the security officer donated high-priced alcohol to the security officer, the contents of the article of the article of the victim, I, G, M, Qua Internet newspaper, etc., it appears that there is a fact that the victim made the statement that "I would directly contain it," and therefore, it is recognized that there is no fact that the content of the article posted by the defendant in relation to this part constitutes false facts, and there is no reasonable ground to believe it.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the facts charged is erroneous in misconception of facts.

The sentence of the fine (700,000 won) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The following circumstances are acknowledged based on the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below on the part of the cost of maintaining the operation of the part of the defense for misconception of facts. In other words, R, which had been performing the duties of the guard leader before the victim becomes the guard leader, appears to have received KRW 100,000 per month from the company side at the time of becoming the guard leader, and ② the victim received KRW 10,000 per month from the company side even after becoming the guard leader, and the victim received KRW 70,000 from the company.