The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s sending the same content as that indicated in the facts charged to G to Kakakao A constitutes a statement of specific facts, and thus, the likelihood of dissemination constitutes a violation of Article 70(2) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc.

B. The Defendants’ act of submitting a thesis written by Defendant A to publish it as the main author of the Korean Self-Governing Administration Association, not the regular member of the Korean Self-Governing Administration Association, and Defendant B, a regular member of the said Council, changed the thesis as if written by Defendant B as the main author, constitutes the crime of interference with business by fraudulent means under the Criminal Act, since it poses abstract risk that may interfere with publication of the thesis.

C. In addition, Defendant B’s submission of a thesis written by deceptive means to MU to MU and recognized as the result of publication as a professor at the above school, it would interfere with the evaluation of teachers at the above school by deceptive means.

2. Determination

A. As to the violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., in order to establish a crime of violation of Article 70(2) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc., there should be a false statement of fact, and the alleged fact should thereby lead to the possibility of infringing on the social value or evaluation of a specific person. In a case where certain expressive act posted through the information and communications network becomes a problem in relation to the crime in question, whether the expression is publicly alleged, whether the expression is simply expression of opinion or comment, or not simply expression of opinion or comment, or if the expression of opinion or comment is expressed at the same time, whether or not, at the same time, expression of fact that constitutes the premise is explicitly expressed, is distinguishable from what is the objective contents of the relevant