The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (in fact-finding or misapprehension of legal principles), ① some of the facts charged in the judgment of the Seoul Central District Court 2013DaMa4644, which are stated in the facts charged in the judgment of the court below, was acquitted, and thus, the contents of data collection and books related thereto cannot be deemed false facts. ② The complainant or the victim of the Seoul Central District Court 2013DaMa4644, which is not the victim F, cannot be deemed the victim of the instant case. Even if false facts are false, the victim’s reputation cannot be deemed to have been undermined. ③ The data collection and book book of the instant case were prepared by the employee of the Specialized Management Business Entities, and the Defendant did not recognize that the facts charged were false, or did not have any intention

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. (1) In order to establish the “crime of defamation by a false statement of fact,” as provided by Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, the criminal should publicly indicate the fact, and should have known that the publicly alleged fact would undermine the people’s social evaluation, and should have recognized that such fact was false (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Do4757, Feb. 25, 2000). In a case where the important part in this context is consistent with objective facts, there is a little difference from the truth in detail or somewhat exaggerated expression.

Although it cannot be viewed as a false fact, in determining whether it is a false fact, it should be determined whether it is an important part that is not consistent with objective facts by examining the purport of the whole contents of the alleged fact.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Do2137 Decided April 29, 2005, and Supreme Court Decision 2006Do6322 Decided July 13, 2007, etc.). (2) The evidence duly adopted and examined by the original court and these evidence.