The accused shall disclose the summary of the judgment of innocence.

On April 18, 2014, the Defendant prepared a resident guide at the Seo-gu Seoul Apartment Management Office of Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul, stating that “D and E, which has spreaded the words of will that the head of the autonomous council has embezzled at the seat of the residents’ general meeting and whose residents have been subject to investigation by the police and has been punished for defamation. It is revealed that two people spread the words of will by falsity in order to promote the publication of the residents,” and attached it on the above apartment bulletin board so that many residents can see, thereby impairing the honor of the victim D by openly pointing out facts.”

Judgment

1. In order for an act that defames a person by openly pointing out a fact to be dismissed and punished pursuant to Article 310 of the Criminal Act, illegality should be avoided, and an actor should also indicate such fact for the public interest when objectively viewed the alleged fact.

Here, "public interest" includes not only a wide range of interests of the State, society, or other general public, but also the interest and interest of a specific social group or its entire members.

Whether it is related to the public interest or not shall be determined by comparing and considering the contents and nature of the alleged fact itself, the scope of the counter-party against which the publication of the relevant fact was made, and the degree of infringement of honor that may be damaged or damaged by the expression itself, etc. In addition, even if the principal purpose of the actor expressing the fact was for the public interest, the application of Article 310 of the Criminal Act may not be excluded even if there was another incidental purpose.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Do4826, Jun. 14, 2007; 2008Do6342, Nov. 13, 2008). 2. Defendant’s legal statement and police against Defendant.