When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The defendant is a person who acts as "B" or "C".

피고인은 2016. 7. 8. 13:43 경 자신의 주소지인 인천 부평구 D 아파트 E 호에서, 자신의 컴퓨터를 이용하여 피해자 F이 베트남 등지에서 성 접대를 받은 사실이 없음에도 불구하고 피해자를 비방할 목적으로, 인터넷 B 사이트에 접속하여, B 이용자 ‘ 닉네임 : G’ 가 작성한 "F 이가 사 드배치 전면 재검토 하자고 난리네! “라고 올린 게시 글에, " 사드 조차도 종 북 좌 빨 새끼들의 추악한 임신공격을 막아 주지는 못하는 가 보다 ㅋ H 도우미관광 / 북 괴 기쁨조관광 / 베트남 소녀 관광" 라는 허위의 댓 글을 게시하여 공연히 피해자의 명예를 훼손하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Some statements made against the defendant during the police interrogation protocol;

1. Statement made to I by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint (including accompanying documents);

1. Article 70 (2) of the Act on Promotion of Utilization of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, etc., concerning facts constituting a crime and the selection of a fine;

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

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant and defense counsel asserted that ① as a national member of the National Assembly, the defendant and defense counsel prepare comments on the facts of crime (hereinafter "the comments of this case") written in the decision to criticize the fact that the victim did not properly engage in the ordinary political activities, for the public interest, not for the purpose of defamation, and ② the facts of writing on the comments of this case are not proved to be false, and ③ the illegality as a legitimate act is not contrary to the social rules.

2. Determination

A. 1) The facts constituting the elements of the offence charged in a criminal trial constitute a false statement of fact.