A. Defendant 1) The misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles did not recognize the falsity of the facts published, and there was a considerable reason to believe that they were true, and there was no purpose to prevent K from being elected with respect to the violation of the Public Official Election Act, and there was no purpose to defame the victim K and L with respect to the crime of violation of the Act on Promotion of Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc. (Defamation).

2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s above sentence is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Although the Defendant alleged the same content in the lower court’s argument about the Defendant’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel by stating in detail the judgment on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 4 through 9, supra). In light of the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s judgment is deemed justifiable

B. In full view of the circumstances mentioned by the lower court in the “reasons for sentencing” (as seen in the lower judgment’s text 9, 10 pages), etc., the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable as it is deemed that the Defendant and the prosecutor’s allegation in this part are unreasonable, on the ground that the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.