The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the facts charged stated that, around December 9, 2015, the Defendant explained the wind power generation project to approximately 30 residents at the community center located in Samjin-si B, Sam-si, 2015, the Defendant stated to the effect that “The victim C is not able to name. Part of the written consent of the residents is fake. A part of the contract deposit for wind power projects was consumed for personal use and committed a crime.”

However, in fact, the victim secured 64 written consent of the residents and 6 copies of written consent to the use of the land, and the corporation D operates a corporation in Category D.

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

2. In determining whether a publicly alleged fact is a false fact in order to apply Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, if an important part is consistent with objective facts in light of the overall purport of the publicly alleged fact, there is a little difference between the truth and the truth or a somewhat exaggerated expression in the detailed statement.

Even if it is not a false fact, it cannot be viewed as false fact.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1220, Oct. 9, 2008) The evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is not sufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant publicly stated a false fact with the purport that “part of the written consent of residents is fake. Part of the contract deposit for wind power business promotion was consumed for personal use and was committed.” There is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, according to evidence, such as the recording of the community year-end general meeting, the Defendant filed a complaint with the Gangwon-gu Police Station stating that “the victim, as if he were to obtain the consent of the prop and residents in connection with the wind power generation business, deceivings him about KRW 110 million.” On or around September 1, 2015, the Defendant, around December 9, 2015, provided that “the victim, at the above community hall, would proceed together with the wind power generation business, and would receive the consent of the residents in the above business, while receiving money from the Defendant, shall receive money from the Defendant.