The sentence of punishment against the Defendants shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

On November 29, 2013, at the conference room of the second apartment complex management office located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, the Defendants: (a) on November 29, 2013, there was no fact that the victim E embezzled the construction cost of apartment playground; (b) on the other hand, there was no 30 apartment residents’ meeting, Defendant A, “The victim deposited 6.6 million won of the construction cost of apartment playground in the name of the chairperson and returned to the head of the Tong; and (c) Defendant B, “The deposit was made in the passbook, and is the embezzlement,” thereby impairing the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Partial statement of the witness F in the court;

1. Application of CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes

1. The Defendants: Article 307 (2) of the Criminal Act concerning the applicable criminal facts and the choice of punishment;

1. Defendants to be suspended from sentence: Fine of 300,000 won; and

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won per day);

1. The Defendants: (a) the Defendants and their defense counsel’s assertion on the assertion of the Defendants and their defense counsel under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act were asserted to the effect that the Defendants did not constitute a crime because they did not have any awareness of false facts; and (b) the Defendants and their defense counsel did not constitute a crime because they were for the public interest. However, according to the evidence of the judgment, the Defendant A asked the victims of early July 2013 about the construction cost; and (c) the amount deposited into the victim’s account was actually paid as the pretext of construction cost around July 12, 2013. Thus, it is difficult to view that there was a justifiable reason for the Defendants to believe that the alleged facts are true, and Article 310 of the Criminal Act does not apply to the acts falling under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act. Therefore,