Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

On March 14, 2013, the Defendant stated that “In a restaurant within the D Agricultural Association Co., Ltd. located in Seocheon-si, the Defendant lost the Handphone, and that “In the absence of any Handphone, the Defendant was the head of the office (victim) without any framework. Until it was opened, there was no room for the main office and there was no room for the office.”

However, there was no fact that the victim G was stolen of the defendant's cell phone device.

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes to witness E and G;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 307 (2) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of penalties;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendant asserts that “the victim is suspected of bringing Handphones,” and that “the victim brought Handphones,” not the victim’s definitely speaks, but the performance is not recognized even if it does not so.

2. In this court, the witness E testified that the defendant made the above remarks over several occasions without hearing the witness E's testimony, the witness E's testimony is consistent and detailed, the witness E's testimony does not seem to have any circumstance to be false, the witness E's testimony is recognized in light of the witness E's testimony and the witness E's testimony and testimony attitude. Thus, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant made the above remarks.

3. Also, performance in the crime of defamation can be recognized by unspecified persons or many.