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

The defendant is a person who operates a restaurant B.

1. On August 30, 2015, at the management office located on the 4th floor located in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, the Defendant: (a) had two employees, such as D (32:32) employees of the management office at the time, who are employees of the management office at the time; (b) the victim E used the Defendant’s restaurant; (c) was removed from the Defendant’s restaurant; and (d) did not have any fact of drinking and drinking, the Defendant changed the Defendant’s meal value of KRW 5 million in the 2007, even though he did not have any fact that he used the Defendant’s restaurant.

쳐 먹을 땐 좋게 쳐 먹고 왜 돈을 안 주냐

“The victim’s reputation was damaged by openly speaking false facts, such as large sounds.”

2. The defendant has committed the same harm;

9. At the time of the meeting of the Building Steering Committee and other agenda items conducted at around 16:00, the fact is whether the victim E used the Defendant’s cafeteria, and instead, the victim “(s) f, director G, director H, director H, director I, auditor J, auditor K, etc.” will be the head of the management office, regardless of the fact that the victim E used the Defendant’s cafeteria, removed the brea value, and did not run for drinking.

The victim’s reputation was undermined by openly expressing the fact that the total amount of KRW 5 million per annum (5 million) is “in the calculation of tax revenue and loss”.

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement protocol by the police for E;

1. Each written confirmation, confirmation, and confirmation of K, F, and D;

1. A criminal investigation report (componing a summary order) [The defendant is not a false fact that the victim was removed from the boomed value, but a true fact, and there was no intention of defamation;

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, namely, ① the defendant was the sales team that the victim was born at the investigative agency from February 2007, and the victim was settled.