The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On November 10, 2017, the Defendant, using “C” around 07:20 on the charge of the instant case, published the comments on “D=F =D” =G = H” in a written statement (E) inserted in “C,” and in the same manner, inserted the same comments on the part of the victim on 44 occasions. On November 11, 2017, the Defendant continued to publish the same comments on the part of the victim. On November 14, 2017, the Defendant published a false statement on the part of the Defendant “J counterpart medical college and the fourth-year D student are sexual assault offenders”, thereby impairing the reputation of the victim.

2. Determination

A. The facts constituting the elements of a crime charged in a criminal trial, whether it is subjective or objective, are the prosecutor’s burden of proof. As such, in a case prosecuted for defamation through an information and communications network indicating false facts under Article 70(2) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., the fact that a person’s social evaluation was revealed was depreciated, and the facts alleged are not consistent with objective truth and are not false, and the prosecutor must prove that the Defendant knew that the alleged facts were false and publicly

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do12132 Decided November 25, 2010, etc.). B.

We examine whether the defendant's statement "victims of sexual assault" is false.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the victim is a person who has engaged in sexual intercourses in online and offline, and from October 26, 2017, many comments on sexual assaults of the victim were published in K from October 26, 2017. In this regard, the defendant prepared a apology with the content of recognizing his/her mistake on some of the cases on October 29, 2017 and posted it to K, and the victim's apology even without the victim's consent.