2. 50,000 won where the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Around 19:30 on April 16, 2012, the Defendant stated that, inasmuch as the Defendant did not receive money relating to the elevator construction at the time when the Victim C was in office as the president of the Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Council for the representatives of B apartment occupants, the Defendant: (a) did not receive money from the former president of the apartment audit; (b) did not participate in the audit and the management office; and (c) did not enter the management office; (d) did not run in the management office; and (e) did not run in the future.”

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness D, E, and F;

1. Each police statement of C or D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint and written confirmation of facts;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 307 (2) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of penalties;

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

3. It is so decided as per Disposition for the reason under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act above.