1. Defendant A is the Dong 503 representative of E apartment in two weeks, and Defendant B is the Dong 514 representative of the above apartment.

On November 28, 2013, the Defendants prepared an incentive in the apartment complex as follows: “Defendant A committed an unlawful act in cleaning and security service company’s selection. The Defendant A tried to dissolve the apartment complex to the front in order to conceal the illegal act. On the other hand, Defendant A made it inevitable to take measures under the law, along with the crime of the residents living in the bid process, the false horse, which is repeated to conceal it, and the crime of the residents living in the road.” Defendant B prepared an incentive with the above incentive, and Defendant B received signature from the above incentive, and distributed the said incentive to the occupants in the apartment complex. Defendant A distributed the said incentive to the apartment.

However, in fact, the Defendants did not have any factual verification as to the fact that the victim F, the president of the above apartment house resident, committed an unlawful act in the selection of the company, and the fact that they intended to dissolve the front line, and there was no presumption of the Defendants’ distribution of printed materials as above.

The Defendants conspired in collusion to defame the victim F by openly pointing out false facts.

2. Determination

A. Of the facts charged in this case as to whether the facts are false or not, the statement of fact in the instant facts is merely an expression of opinion or insult that “I would like to be dissolved even in the cleaning and the selection of security service company.” The remainder is merely an expression of opinion or insult. The statement in F’s investigative agency and this court, and a copy of the council of occupants’ representatives’ representatives’ representatives’ meeting (as of March 14, 2013, April 18, 2013, April 26, 2013) is written alone.