1. Of the part on the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the court of first instance, 3,500,000 won against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. Determination on the main claim

A. 1) The Defendant is a member of CKapet “D” and “E”. 2) The Defendant filed a summary order with the Suwon District Court due to a violation of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (Defamation) against the Plaintiff, and the case was deliberated upon as a combination of No. 2014 high-level 2468 (2014 high-level 2829, 2015 high-level 632, 2015 high-level 632, 2015 high-level 191 was added). On July 27, 2017, the lower court convicted the Defendant on the facts constituting an offense listed in attached Form 1, which was part of the facts charged under the foregoing subparagraph 2014 high-level 2468, and sentenced the Defendant to a fine of KRW 10 million, including the consolidated case.

In the above trial, the defendant argued that the crime of insult was not identified as the victim in writing, and that the harm caused by the preparation of a false diagnosis is widely known to our society in the case of defamation, and thus the illegality is excluded. However, the above court rejected the defendant's assertion to the purport that the defendant's expression was the target of the defendant's expression, that is,, the "person who caused damage by submitting a false diagnosis document" could sufficiently recognize that a considerable number of members of the members who referred to as the plaintiff, and that even in the case of defamation, it cannot be deemed that the harm caused by the preparation of a false diagnosis should not be known.

3) In the appellate court (U.S. District Court 2017No5775) in which both the Defendant and the Prosecutor have appealed against the above judgment, the Defendant asserted that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff regarding the guilty portion among the above 2014 Go-Ma2468 was forged, the victim is difficult to be deemed specified, and that it corresponds to the interest of the Kafe users, and thus the illegality is dismissed. However, the above appellate court stated the altered portion in the opinion that the Plaintiff asserted that it was altered, either in writing with the intent of explaining or emphasizing damage to the investigation agency, or in writing.