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

On April 5, 2010 to December 30, 2010, the Defendant posted an article on the Internet G site (H) stating that “I think how much of the parts opposing animals love and dog eating would be considered,” and “I believe that the father of the representative body during each year was put in the freezing of the protective station to take advantage of the hacker farm to take advantage of the hacker's hacker's hacker's hacker's hacker's hacker's hacker's hacker's hacker's hacker's hacker's h to take advantage of the hacker's hacker's hacker.”

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by divulging public false information through the information and communication network for the purpose of slandering the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement at court (the date of the eighth trial);

1. The statements of witnesses F and I in the fifth trial records;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A complaint;

1. Details of J e-mail correspondence (No. 4);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes (No. 10-7) of the full text of the publication;

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

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that “The Defendant and his defense counsel posted the same article as the facts recorded in the facts constituting a crime did not constitute a false fact or the public interest, and there was considerable reason to believe that the content thereof was true or true.”

In light of the records, it is recognized that the victim has stored the damaged dog in the air conditioners of the protective station, but this court is also recognized.