A. According to the testimony of the witness I, J, and K at the court of original instance, each of the following facts: (a) the defendant made several times at the time and place indicated in this part of the facts charged; (b) the defendant made a conflict between the defendant and the victim F; (c) the defendant was suffering from damages; and (d) the defendant was punished after the victim got back and went back again; and (d) the first opinion of the witness I, who observed this process, clearly made it clear whether the defendant's statement was referred to as the victim as a matter of course; (c) the J and K was put to the management office at the victim's request; and (d) the defendant was sufficiently aware of the fact that the defendant's statement was made at the management office of the victim; and (e) the situation where the victim could be sufficiently inferred. However, the court below acquitted the defendant as to this part of the facts charged.

B. The sentence (one million won of a fine) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. 1) On October 11, 2013, the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, on or around October 16, 2013, destroyed the victim’s reputation by pointing out false facts to the effect that “I, 1 and 1 security guards J, and 2 and K of two security guards “I would have to put the victim into the Republic of Korea (F) with a bad wheels,” while the Defendant did not have to do so, at around 16:00, at the G Apartment Management Office of Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the fact that the victim F, who is the head of the above apartment management office, was in bad faith.”