The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the Defendants.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding or misunderstanding of the legal principles stated by the Defendants cannot be deemed to have indicated false facts because the important parts are consistent with the truth even if there are several or somewhat exaggerated expressions. Even if the falsity is false, it cannot be said that the Defendants believed that the alleged facts are true, and thus, there is no awareness of falsity. The Defendants’ illegality should be dismissed since they stated facts for the public interest.

B. The sentencing of the lower court (a fine of one million won) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. Before determining on the grounds of appeal by the Defendants, prior to the judgment, the prosecutor examined the Defendants’ appeal ex officio, and after going through lawful procedures, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the indictment to delete the part of “N Auditor sold a house in September 2012” and “unqualified N” portion in the attached list 2 of the crime committed against Defendant A. This court permitted this and changed the subject of the judgment by this court, and the remaining crime of interference with business, interference with business, and defamation with the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act are concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, and thus, the judgment of the court below against Defendant A should be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, for the above reasons, the entire reversal of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A cannot be exempted.

B. However, the Defendants’ assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the grounds for the above ex officio reversal.

C. In full view of the following facts acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendants stated false facts and had awareness of falsity at the time.