All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the statement of the victim with credibility by the prosecutor, the court below acquitted the defendant on the ground that the defendant was fully aware of some of the crimes of impairing honor around August 14, 2010, the crime of impairing honor around August 22, 2010, and the crime of impairing honor around August 23, 2010, but it erred by misapprehending the legal principles and misapprehending the legal principles.

B. As to each of the defamations as stated in the judgment of the court below, Defendant 1’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles) is true, the Defendant’s oral remarks are all true, and the Defendant’s oral remarks do not constitute the elements of defamation because they have no public performance because they are the part of the victim, and the contents thereof are related to the public interest, and its illegality should be dismissed on the grounds that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the Defendant

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the crime is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

B) As to the violation of the Communications Secrecy Protection Act as stated in the judgment of the court below, the recording is a legitimate act or an emergency escape because the defendant had the contents of his/her intent to see the defendant while hearing B’s conversation, which constitutes a recording to defend him/her later.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the crime is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of suspended sentence for six months of imprisonment, suspension of qualifications for one year, and community service hours) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records of the court’s scope of trial, the court below rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecution against some of the Defendant’s defamations and defamations, not guilty, and not guilty of part of the remainder of the violation of the Act on the Protection of Communications Secrecy, and the violation of the Act on the Labor Standards. As to the guilty part, the prosecutor appealed against the acquittal part, and the dismissed part was separated and finalized as it was without appeal by the Defendant and

Therefore, this is applicable.