The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There is no fact-finding that the Defendant made such remarks as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that convicted the defendant is erroneous.

B. The lower court’s sentence on the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant is consistent from the investigative agency to this court, and the Defendant is able to ask D about the victim’s royalty while having divided D and talks from the point of view that D operated on the date and time indicated in the instant facts charged. This is the same as the Defendant is elected because D and D was good.

However, there is a female problem.

(b)be far away due to female problems;

As to the phrase “I”, “I” is asked as “I,” and “I had a female story in agricultural cooperatives.”

The victim will be able to go out well by the people who are suffering from female problems.

The facts charged in this case have been denied by asserting that there was only the fact that she did not speak as stated in the facts charged in this case, and that there was no such words as stated in the facts charged.

2 살피건대, 원심이 적법하게 채택ㆍ조사한 증거들에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정들, 즉 ① D는 수사기관에서부터 원심 법정에 이르기까지 일관하여, “이 사건 공소사실 기재 일시에 점집에서 이야기를 나누던 중, 피고인이 피해자의 운세에 관하여 물어보아, ‘좋다’고 말하니, 피고인이 이 사건 공소사실 기재와 같은 말을 하기에, ‘오메 어쩐디야. 큰일났네’라고 말하였고, 그때 다른 손님이 와서 더 이상 이야기하지 않았다”는 취지로 진술한 점, ② D는 피고인과 위와 같이 대화를 나눈 후 며칠 지나지 않아 지인과 통화하면서 ‘피해자가 간통하여 4,000만 원을 물어주었다는 소문을 들었다’고...