The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not speak as described in paragraph (1) of the facts charged, and the Defendant made a statement as described in paragraph (2) of the facts charged, but the illegality should be avoided as it was for the public interest of apartment residents.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The following circumstances can be acknowledged based on the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined in the court below as to the facts charged No. 1. G, i.e., the following circumstances: (i) from the police to the court of the court below, “F has made a fine of one million won,” and (ii) the principal presented documents to the defendant.

In other words, the lower court and the lower court did not have consistently stated that the Defendant stated that the Defendant “F had been punished by a fine of one million won.”

However, H stated that “I was unable to hear if I am in the atmosphere of talking with each other”, and the place of the crime of this case cannot be ruled out that H was unable to hear the Defendant’s horses. ③ The Defendant argued that there was no speech as described in paragraph (1) of the facts charged, but at the time of the police investigation, the Defendant stated that “I am in the influence of alcohol and thus I am in the well-known memory.” At the time of the police investigation, H stated that “I am in the same manner as stated in the instant facts charged.”

G and H also held that the Defendant was significantly drinking at the time of the instant case.

In full view of the fact that the defendant's memory at the time of the instant case cannot be ruled out, it can be recognized that the defendant at the time of the instant case impairs the victim's reputation by speaking as stated in the facts charged.

This part of the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

B. The judgment of the lower court on the charge No. 2 is also the same purport.