The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Around October 14, 2017, the Defendant in the factory office lost the victim’s reputation by transmitting the phrase “Irrier, Irrier, Irrier, Irrier, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith, Irrith,

Article 307 of the former Criminal Code provides that "a statement of fact" is an objective element for the crime of defamation of reputation under Article 307 of the latter Criminal Code, and "fact" here refers to "fact that may undermine people's social evaluation."

Therefore, Article 307 (2) of the Criminal Code applies to the specific facts charged in this case is premised on the fact that the defendant stated (the fact that the victim died) may undermine the social evaluation of the victim.

In that sense, according to the records, “the fact that the victim died” is obvious to anyone, including the subject person, in light of the circumstances, method, and content of the above statement, and therefore, it is difficult to deem that such fact exists even by this abstract “the possibility of undermining the victim’s social evaluation.”

Of course, the Defendant’s act in the facts charged is likely to impair the victim’s reputation, but it is not attributable to “a insulting the victim’s death (i.e., an insulting act that expresses sacrific sentiment that may undermine the victim’s social evaluation)” resulting from “the fact that the victim has been informed of the victim’s death differently from fact (i.e., an act of expressing facts that could undermine the victim’s social evaluation).”

In the end, the defendant alleged false facts to be damaged.