The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

, however, for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The prosecutor of the grounds of appeal argues that the court below did not determine whether defamation was established by factual statements in the grounds of appeal, and that this is a violation of the court's duty to judge as to the reduced fact.

However, at the time of the trial, the prosecutor applied for amendments to Bill of Indictment with the content that the prosecutor added the defamation by factual facts as the ancillary charge, and this court permitted it and found the defendant guilty of the ancillary charge. Thus, the above argument is not judged separately.

The statement by the accused is a false fact.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. On November 10, 2017, at around 07:20, the Defendant, using the “C” as “C,” written comments on the part of the victim D, and inserted the same comments on the part of the victim 44 times via the same method.

On November 11, 2017, the Defendant continued to publish in the Defendant B(I) “The students of JJJJJa University and the fourth and fourth grade D are sexual assault offenders” in the public notice of the false information, thereby impairing the honor of the victims.

B. According to the evidence, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the grounds that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant was false, based on the following facts: (a) since October 26, 2017, many comments on sexual assault against the victim began to be published to K; and (b) the victim prepared a apology to acknowledge his/her mistake in certain cases on October 29, 2017 and posted it to K. In full view of these facts, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty.

As a result of review of records, the above determination by the court below is correct and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding facts.

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument of mistake is without merit.

3. Preliminary.