The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles or factual errors);

A. The contents posted by the Defendant through the instant vindication are true and the Defendant’s act is for the public interest.

B. The Defendant merely prepared and submitted to the election commission the instant letter of vindication regarding the receipt of the request for dismissal of himself, and did not know that the instant letter of vindication will be posted.

Therefore, the defendant did not have the intention of defamation.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant

A. The facts charged in the instant case reveal that the Defendant is the representative of B apartment C Dong and D Dong Dong in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, and the victim E is the head of the management office of the said apartment. The council of occupants’ representatives determined the implementation of the project to replace the above apartment water supply center around February 15, 2017, and subsequently promoted the replacement project, such as the resident briefing session, design and supervision services contract. As above, the Defendant, on May 22, 2017, when the project to replace the apartment water supply center was being implemented, went to the special election of the president on May 22, 2017. However, the Defendant did not interfere with the current special election of the president by stating that the request to dismiss the said apartment water supply center was recommended, and that the victim, the head of the management office, who was the victim of the said replacement project, was in favor of the said replacement project. However, on September 19, 2017, the Defendant did not interfere with the election commission’s election of the chairman by 20.

B. The lower court’s judgment is the chief executive officer, as alleged by the Defendant.