Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

A. Defendant 1) On the first judgment of the court below, Defendant 1 stated the victim E’s “indecent act” in the written audit report prepared around April 2010 by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles on the victim E’s appeal. Although the victim did not commit a sexual indecent act, there is considerable reason to determine that the above victim committed an indecent act on the Internet in light of the above report’s content. Although the above victim did not have committed an indecent act on the Internet bulletin, the part of the defendant’s writing written indecent act is all true except for sexual indecent act among those mentioned on the above victim’s online bulletin, the court below convicted the defendant even though the part of the indecent act on the family is false, even though the purpose of the indecent act was not recognized, the court below convicted the defendant. (2) The first judgment of the court of the judgment of the court of the court of the first instance contains an error of law by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles against the defendant’s punishment (2,00,000 won) which the first judgment of the court of the judgment of the second judgment was too unjustifiable.

(2) The sentence imposed on the Defendant by the second instance of unfair sentencing (the fine of KRW 1,00,000) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (with regard to the acquittal portion of the second judgment, mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principle) 1) The Defendant, in violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc. (the Defendant of defamation), revealed false facts through the information and communications network for the purpose of slandering the victim’s D reconstruction promotion, thereby impairing the honor of the above victim, but the Defendant