On April 10, 2014, F and 37 members of the D-Business Labor Union filed a lawsuit claiming the so-called "ordinary wage" with the Suwon District Court of Suwon, wherein the defendant is the operator of the D-Business, G and two others.

On July 16, 2014, at around 14:00, the Defendant received a copy of the driver’s license that contains the complainant’s address, photograph, resident registration number, etc. attached to the written statement and written statement prepared by H for the side of the D enterprise from the attorney of the Plaintiff, using his e-mail.

피고인은 같은 날 22:00경 D기업 노동조합원들이 접속하는 인터넷 메신저인 ‘I 밴드’에 고소인이 작성한 진술서 및 고소인의 운전면허증 스캔 파일과 함께 “다 같은 근로자이기에 조합원이건 비조합원이건 언젠가는 하나가 될 수도 있다는 건방진 꿈을 가졌었습니다, 이래서 구분되어질 사람은 구분될 수 밖에 없나봅니다, 입안이 깔깔하네요”라는 내용의 글을 게시하여 비방할 목적으로 정보통신망을 이용하여 공공연하게 사실을 드러내어 고소인의 명예를 훼손하였다.

2. The defendant's arguments and materials written by the defendant cannot be viewed as a fact that may undermine the social value of the complainant's personality, and even if so, they are related to the public interest, they do not constitute a purpose of defamation.

3. Determination

A. In order to establish the crime of defamation as to whether an expression constitutes defamation, a specific fact should be publicly alleged that is likely to infringe on the victim’s social value or evaluation. Whether an expression constitutes defamation should be determined by objective evaluation in accordance with the social norms of the expression.

Supreme Court Decision 201No. 27. 201