명예훼손
The prosecutor's appeal against the defendant A is dismissed.
1. Taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding) has motive for committing each crime against the Defendant; (b) the H’s statement that corresponds to the facts charged against the Defendant is reliable; and (c) other witnesses of the lower court have witnessed the Defendant to speak as defamation against the victim even though they differ from the date and time indicated in the facts charged, the fact that the Defendant made the statement identical to
(H) On February 2, 201, the lower court acknowledged the Defendant’s intent of defamation on the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., around November 2010 at the police investigation stage: (a) although the Defendant stated that he had sexual assault at the office where several members are located, he did not have the head of the branch at the time of investigation; (b) requested interpretation; (c) the Defendant continued the said speech after having entered the office; and (d) the lower court stated that the Defendant had been able to other members through a glass window outside the office; (b) there is no consistency with the circumstances in which the Defendant made the statement; (b) the Defendant made the statement to the effect that Q was able to make the statement at all different from the date and time; and (d) it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant’s statement and the fact that N did not comply with the facts charged by taking account of the circumstances described in the facts charged, as stated in the facts charged, at the same time and without any other evidence presented by the prosecutor.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal against the defendant A is without merit and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act.