Defendant

All appeals filed by B and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (1) The materials posted by the victim of the misunderstanding of facts on the Pest North Korea were altered, and the article posted by Defendant B was false.

Although it cannot be seen as a public interest, the court below convicted all of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (2 million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

B. A prosecutor 1) misunderstanding the facts (as to Defendant A), the victim posted by Defendant A (as to Defendant A), is distributing the coffee machine of “non-fixed-satise-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis-satis

Even if the defendant posted the above notice, it was aimed at slandering the victim who operates a competitor rather than for the public interest, but the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case. The judgment of the court below is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Undue sentencing (as to Defendant B), the sentence (2 million won in penalty) imposed by the lower court (as to Defendant B) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts in the original trial, the lower court, on the ground that Defendant B asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in this case, and on the ground that the lower court, under the title “judgment on the argument of Defendant B and the defense counsel,” stated in the written judgment in detail, rejected the above assertion. In light of the aforementioned judgment of the lower court compared with the records, the lower court’s judgment is just and acceptable, and there was an error of law by misunderstanding

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, it is true.