On May 2, 2013, the Defendant of defamationd on May 2, 2013, the following items: (a) on May 2, 2013, the 18 bulletin boards and each Dong elevator, and (b) despite the fact that the victim D, who is the head of the above apartment management office, used the management expenses unfairly, damaged the honor of the victim by openly pointing out false facts as to the management expenses, regardless of the fact that the victim D, who is the head of the above apartment management office, did not unlawfully use the management expenses.

B. On May 22, 2012, the Defendant of defamation, on May 22, 2012, damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts as if the head of the apartment management office embezzled management office embezzled management expenses, by attaching or distributing printed materials to the title “the rights of the residents of the C apartment” although the victim D, who is the head of the said apartment management office, did not unlawfully use the management expenses.”

2. Determination

A. In order for the crime of defamation to be established by a false statement under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, the criminal must publicly indicate the fact, and should have been false as a result of undermining the people’s social evaluation, and should have known that such fact was false.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Do4757 delivered on February 25, 2000, etc.). B.

However, each of the facts charged in the instant case are printed by the Defendant.