Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

1. On January 21, 201, the Defendant, etc. of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (Defamation) of the Act on Promotion, etc. of the Utilization of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information (hereinafter “Act”) on January 21, 2011, posted a notice to the effect that it is possible from February 25, 201 to lease a dental unit owned by the Defendant, which is located under the name of “in Denden C” (hereinafter “in Denden C”) on the bulletin board of “innden C”, which is a dental website related to dental affairs, to the effect that the victim would run the said dental unit even if the victim is not a dentist, the part of the Defendant must be a dentist, and the license holder, other than Broman or dentist, should not be considered as a dentist.”

However, the above dental tenant was the wife of the victim and the dentist.

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged his reputation by divulging public false information through information and communication network with a view to slandering the victim.

2. On January 25, 2011, the Defendant, etc. of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (Defamation) on violation of Act on Promotion, etc. of Act on Promotion, Information and Communications Network Utilization and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc. (defluence) indicated on the Internet bulletin board around January 25, 201 as the title “ [Name] Osan C-Gumical Department and Correctional Compatibility (no additional training expenses)” to the same effect as the preceding paragraph, and the lessee of the foregoing dental license as the victim E is F, the lessee of the foregoing dental license as stated in the preceding paragraph to the same effect as the victim’s wife, who is a dentist and dentist.” (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do1198, Jan. 25, 2011).

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged his reputation by divulging public false information through information and communication network with a view to slandering the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. The witness E and F, respectively.