The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although there was no fact that the Defendant stated in V, W, and X the facts charged, the lower court accepted the facts charged in this case and convicted the Defendant. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Even if the defendant made the above remarks, since the facts alleged by the defendant were related to the public interest, and there were reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant believed it to be true, the defendant's act cannot be punished as defamation under Article 310 of the Criminal Act. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the court below's judgment that found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and there is no illegality of misconception of facts alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. The act of impairing a person’s reputation by openly pointing out a fact-finding as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles is related to the public interest when objectively viewed the facts alleged in order not to be punished due to the dismissal of illegality pursuant to Article 310 of the Criminal Act, and the actor should not be deemed to have expressed the facts for the public interest. Moreover, there should be reasonable grounds to believe that the alleged facts are true or, at least, the actor believed to be true and to have believed

Supreme Court Decision 94Do237 delivered on August 26, 1994, Supreme Court Decision 2005Do5276 delivered on November 23, 2006, etc.