The lower court: (a) the Defendant damaged the honor of the victims by openly pointing out facts or false facts on the part of the victim E or I, or the victim F, on the part of the Defendant’s employees who interpreted the Defendant’s horses, H in the restaurant room operated by the victim E or I, or the Defendant’s horses; and (b) the victim E and F’s social evaluation was humping; and (c) the victim F.

The decision was determined.

In light of the relevant legal principles and evidence, the lower court did not err in its judgment by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations on the developments leading up to the delivery of printed articles, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal by the Defendant, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on intention and performance in the crime of defamation, or by misapprehending the rules of logic and experience.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.