Of them, the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (Defamation) is attached.

A. Although the facts charged against the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (Defamation) were found guilty on the following grounds, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on defamation or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(1) Since the victim bank could not manipulate or process it as a whole since the victim bank's D investigation of Nos. 1 and 1 of the annexed crime list (1) in the judgment of the court below was conducted for all world employees through an external company, this paper published by the defendant that the bank management operated D. The defendant stated false facts, and the defendant also recognized the above facts, and thus, the purpose of defamation is recognized.

(2) Although the receipt of the personnel class 2 of the attached list of crimes (1) Nos. 2 in the attached table of the court below was due to the low personal capacity point, this paper published by the defendant that the employee was a retaliation for the establishment of a democratic labor union, which led to a statement of false facts, and this content has a negative perception that the personnel of the victim bank's management is arbitrary, and thus, the social evaluation of the victim bank was damaged.

(3) Although the benefits of the victim bank account for Nos. 3 and 6 of the attached Table 1 of the judgment of the court below are considerably high among commercial banks, the total amount of allowances cannot be determined arbitrarily by guidelines set up in accordance with the Financial Supervisory Service’s guidelines for preparing published materials, the victim bank employee’s wage competitiveness at the lowest industry is the industry, and the standard for calculating the average amount of annual salary per capita is different from that of other commercial banks, the article posted by the defendant indicates false facts. Such contents are employees.