The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is not only true facts, but also true facts, and the Defendant’s act does not have intention or public performance as to defamation, and thus, the lower court convicted the Defendant, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2. Determination

A. In order to establish the crime of defamation by publicly alleging false facts as provided by Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act as to whether a publicly alleged fact is false or not, the criminal must publicly indicate the fact, and should be false because the publicly alleged fact affects people’s social evaluation. In the event that the material part in this context is consistent with objective facts, there is a little difference from the truth in detail or somewhat exaggerated expression.

Although it cannot be viewed as a false fact, in determining whether it is a false fact, it should be determined whether it is an important part that is not consistent with objective facts by examining the purport of the whole contents of the alleged fact.

On the other hand, the prosecutor actively proves that the publication is false and that there is no proof that the publication is true cannot be established the crime of defamation by publication of false facts. However, the crime of defamation by publication of false facts cannot be established on the sole basis of the fact that the publication is false.

However, in determining whether or not the above burden of proof has been fulfilled, a prosecutor who is the active party shall prove not only the existence of a fact actively, but also the absence of a specific act at a specified period and place without reasonable doubt. However, it is more easy for a prosecutor to prove the absence of a fact that has not been specified in a specified period and space to prove and prove the existence of a fact.