Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one million won shall be the one day.

On December 1, 2015, the Defendant: (a) requested the employment of a child of the person who was operated by the victim, even though the victim D, who was operating the airline, did not escape or receive money from others after committing a fraudulent act; and (b) the Defendant did not request the employment of a child of the person who was operated by the victim.

E “At least 100 U.S. S.s. by the alleged representative fraud of the airline.”

고.. 당시 이사장한테 자세히 말은 못하고 ㅠㅠㅠ 뒷돈 챙겼다는 말도 있고” 라는 내용의 문자 메시지를 전송하였다.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Protocols of examination of witnesses regarding D;

1. Each police officer with regard to F, and each protocol concerning the examination of suspects by the prosecution;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the non-prosecution decision, investigation report (related to the submission of e-mailD data), photographs, stockholders list, certificates to be registered in the Kakao Stockholm, photographs, etc., investigation reports (related to the submission of D data), and E text messages received;

1. Article 307 (2) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 307 (2) of the choice of punishment;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Defendant's assertion;

A. The crime of this case is not only lacking performance but also there was no intention of defamation (the defendant argued that he did not have "the purpose of defamation", but the crime of defamation under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act does not require the purpose of defamation. Thus, the above assertion is without merit in itself, since the crime of defamation under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act does not require the purpose of defamation.

2. Determination

A. The performance, which is a constituent element of the crime of defamation, refers to a state in which many, unspecified or unspecified persons can recognize it.