A. The Defendant did not confirm the details of the information or information from the Election Management Committee and posted the same article as stated in the instant facts charged, and received notification from the J as to the result of the victim’s reporting. Therefore, the Defendant was aware of the fact that the statement was false.

B. The conjunctive finding that the Defendant was unaware of the falsity

Even if the defendant's act constitutes a crime of damaging reputation due to factual time, the court below should have judged this part of the indictment, even if there is no change in indictment.

2. Determination

A. First, we examine the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts.

The court below found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant prepared each notice on the facts charged, and that the Defendant was aware of the falsity of the facts stated in the facts charged, in light of the fact that J, who is a public official of the Election Management Commission, was made or altered in the form of contact between the Defendant and the Defendant, and that J, which was a public official of the Election Management Commission, was made or altered in the form of contact between the Defendant and the Defendant.

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in a thorough comparison with the evidence, the lower court’s determination is justifiable, and the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. Next, we examine the Prosecutor’s ancillary assertion.

1) Among the facts charged of defamation by a false factual presentation as provided by Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, the facts alleged in the facts charged of defamation by a factual presentation as provided by Article 307(1) of the same Act are included, and thus, in a case where the facts alleged in the facts charged of defamation by a false factual presentation were prosecuted, the facts alleged in