A. In the statement of facts in the facts charged, the Defendant did not have made the remainder of the statement excluding the portion of “I am going to a public official of the Gu Office.”

B. It was true that the Defendant, as stated in the facts charged, made the Defendant’s statement that “the Gu office official was a member of the Gu office.” However, this is a statement of true facts for the benefit of the old branch office’s occupation, and the Defendant’s act is dismissed as unlawful.

C. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unfair sentencing (the fine of KRW 1,00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the facts-finding (1) of the facts-finding case as of June 28, 2012, the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, and the following circumstances, i.e., the victim consistently made a statement from the investigative agency to the lower court to the court, i.e., the Defendant’s statement to the same effect as the victim, ii) F, G, and H, which were at the time of the instant case, stated in the court of the lower court to the same effect as the victim, and Ma and P, which stated that the Defendant did not hear such a statement from the Defendant at the lower court and the court of the first instance, were on the seat of the victim, F, G, and H, at a distance away from the seat at the time of the instant case. Accordingly, the Defendant’s assertion in this part is without merit.

(2) The evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court on September 5, 2012, and the following circumstances, i.e., the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the lower court, i.e., the J at the present site of this case, (i) consistently made a statement from the investigative agency to the lower court that the Defendant had consistently made the same statement as the facts charged; (ii) in the court of the lower court, F, G, and H.