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

On January 2, 2017, the Defendant, using the Defendant’s cell phone for the purpose of slandering the victim D on January 2, 2017, received an estimate from the victim who participated in E and F, and subsequently did not make a final request for photographing. As to the circumstances in which G did not make a request for photographing, the Defendant rejected the victim’s payment of money without considering the specific estimate of the victim’s injury on the victim’s sound attitude.

I written a statement to the effect "................."

However, in fact, the victim did not appear in G, or did not present an unwritten estimate, and it was because the victim did not request the victim to take a photograph of the product from G by receiving an estimate and a sample from the victim and the defendant, and then selected the defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant abused the victim's reputation by disclosing false information through information and communications networks with a view to slandering the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Evidential materials attached to written complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report an investigation (teleline investigation) and record an investigation status (H statement hearing);

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

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 summary of the argument was the Kakao Stockholm room where the Defendant written a writing was 30,00 persons including the Defendant, and there was an implied agreement that the conversation made in the above toilet room does not notify others. Since the Defendant, as well as the Defendant, and the F and E, who participated in the toilet room, posted a conversation that could impair the honor of the victim, the Defendant could spread the above conversation.