All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed by a defense counsel).

1. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant C, the term “statement of fact” in the crime of defamation refers to a report or statement on specific past or present facts in time and space, and the contents of the statement can be proven by evidence. In determining whether the report or statement is a fact or an opinion, the determination should take into account the ordinary meaning and usage of the language, the possibility of proof, the context in which the speech in question was used, the social situation in which the expression was made, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do17237 Decided September 2, 201, etc.). Moreover, Article 310 of the Criminal Act provides that the act under Article 307(1) of the Criminal Act is true and solely for the public interest is not punishable. In order to establish the crime of defamation by a statement of false facts under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, a statement of false facts is established. Since the criminal should have recognized that such fact was false, there is no room to apply Article 310 of the Criminal Act to the act falling under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act.

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Do3675 Decided February 28, 2013, etc.). In full view of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted, the lower court determined on October 1, 2010, that the Defendant’s remarks, among the content of the instant indictment, embezzled the amount of KRW 10 billion from the victim’s personal account to the personal account, constituted defamation due to the assertion of false facts, and found the Defendant guilty of defamation as of October 1, 2010 among the facts charged in the instant case.

Examining the records in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the lower court.