B shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

Defendant

B If the above fine is not paid, 50,000 won.

Defendant

B is a person who resides in Gangwon E, and the victim F is a victim of the above E.

On December 29, 2012, the Defendant damaged the honor of the victim by openly pointing out the fact that “F embezzleds KRW 427,000 of the recovery fund for village flood damage in 1996 and the recovery fund that should have been distributed to B,” among 80 village residents of E community center located in Gangwon G.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant B’s partial statement

1. Each legal statement of witness F, H and I;

1. Notice of reasons for institution of public prosecution, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 307 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

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

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant B and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant B and the defense counsel asserted that the defendant, with the consent of the victim, disclosed the fact that the victim embezzled the funds for the recovery of flood damage in 1996, and that this is for the public interest, so the illegality is dismissed.

2. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court: (a) the Defendant refused to disclose community funds and government subsidies in 201 and 2012 when the Defendant demanded by the Defendant; (b) the Defendant published the fact of embezzlement of funds for the restoration of flood damage in 1996; (c) the Defendant first referred to the embezzlement of funds for the restoration of flood damage to the victim during a dispute that occurred between the Defendant and the victim due to the disclosure of the disbursement details of public funds at the community center; (d) the Defendant, at the time of the dispute that was in place, referred to the embezzlement of funds for the restoration of flood damage to the victim; (e) the Defendant, at his house, presented a notice of the reason for the institution of indictment to the public; and (e) the Defendant, on January 25, 1998, prepared a written statement to the effect that he will not open a will in relation to the restoration fund.