A. In relation to the crime of defamation among the facts charged of mistake of facts, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s punishment (two million won of fine) is too unreasonable in light of the circumstances leading to the Defendant’s instant crime and the Defendant’s reflection, etc.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence on the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., ① the defendant filed several complaints against the victim in fraud, etc., but did not have suspicion or was rejected, etc.; ② the defendant received a decision of dismissal in an application for adjudication against the victim (Seoul High Court 2012 Seocho Jae-gu5096), ② the defendant filed a civil lawsuit against the victim (Seoul Central District Court 201Da402191) but the judgment against the victim became final and conclusive; ③ the defendant created a right to collateral security of KRW 1 billion with the maximum debt amount of KRW 1 billion with the maximum debt amount of KRW 200 million with the victim’s real estate and paid KRW 1.2 billion to the victim as alleged in the judgment of the court below, the circumstance that the defendant paid KRW 1.2 billion to the victim is deemed contradictory to the defendant’s aforementioned assertion. Thus, the defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

B. In full view of the following factors: (a) there was no agreement between the Defendant and the victim on the assertion of unfair sentencing; (b) there was a number of criminal records against the Defendant; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment; and (d) details and result of the instant crime; and (c) the circumstances of the Defendant’s assertion in the instant argument,