F is the representative of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “G”).

1. Defendant A

A. The Defendant, at the E office located at H around September 2013 in Jeju, around September 2013, had no money to the victim F to the creditor I.

There is no construction cost to G and no money will be paid.

“.....”

B. The Defendant does not have the remaining construction cost to be paid to the J, the president of the subcontractor, at the first E office around December 2013.

When the remaining construction cost is paid, the F shall not be paid to the subcontractor and shall be locked.

“.....”

The Defendant, referring to such false facts, thereby damaging the credibility of the victim.

2. Defendant B, as described in paragraph (1) by J around December 2013, the Defendant asked the Defendant to “G” by telephone in order to verify the horses from A.

The victim’s credit was damaged by referring to false information as “.............

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the recognition of a criminal facts ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads to the judge to have the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that such conviction would lead to such conviction, even if there is doubt of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or vindication contradictoryness or uncomfortable dismissal, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 2011). Meanwhile, the crime of credit injury under the Criminal Act requires that a person’s credit should be damaged by spreading false facts or by fraudulent means, and the dissemination of false facts here means spreading the past or present facts that do not conform with the objective truth, and thus expressing the defendant’s simple opinion or value judgment.