When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

1. On November 13, 2014, the Defendant of defamation: (a) on November 13, 2014, at the library shelter located in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju apartment complex, the victim D, who is the president of the council of occupants’ representatives of the above apartment complex, has not received the back payment by embezzlement of the above apartment management expenses or by adding the construction expenses on the road packing of the apartment complex; (b) despite the fact that the victim D, who is the president of the council of occupants’ representatives, has not received the back payment, the Defendant damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts by stating that “The president D of the council of occupants’ representatives embezzled the apartment management expenses by using the method of spending the food and drinking value of the council of occupants’ representatives from the management expenses; and (c) if the road was packed on the packaging of the part, the construction expenses shall be KRW 230 million,000,000,000 for the construction expenses.”

2. On November 2014, the Defendant defamationed the victim’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts by stating that “D, the president of the council of occupants’ representatives, who is the president of the council of occupants’ representatives, has excessively disbursed the road distribution equipment and embezzled the operating expenses by illegally using the operation expenses,” despite the fact that the victim D did not receive the back payment by embezzlement of the above apartment management expenses or by lowering the construction expenses for the road packing of the apartment.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. The defendant and defense counsel on the assertion of the defendant and defense counsel in the E and F statements claim that the defendant and defense counsel did not use the words written in the above facts constituting the crime to E and F, etc.

In a case where the statements of witnesses, including the victim, are mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, there is no separate evidence to deem that there is no credibility from an objective perspective.