The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

1. On August 30, 201, the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case stated that, at the Dong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Residents’ Meeting room of the Residents’ Meeting, 200 persons, including the representative, staff of the apartment management office, residents, etc., attend the Dong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Residents’ Meeting, and that, at the residents’ meeting, the Defendant “I have a strong interest in the selection of the Vitice Center. 905 Dong representative, the Dong representative, “........., there is a strong interest in the selection of the Vitice Center.”

However, in fact, the victim D, the representative of the Dong 905, did not receive money or goods or provide any preferential treatment in the selection of the Vitice Center's operating company.

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

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal reveals various problems that may be doubtful in the fairness of the selection process in light of the relationship between G and 905 Dong representative D and the process of the company selection in relation to the selection of the apartment complex 9 complex operator company in this case. The defendant, at the residents' general meeting, told that "it has a great degree of interest in the selection of the Vitice Center" in the process of informing the residents of the problems. The representative of Dong Dong Dong Dong 905 did not have any intention to impair D's honor.

3. The judgment of this Court

A. Since the facts constituting the elements of a crime charged in a criminal trial are the prosecutor's burden of proof, whether it is subjective or objective, the prosecutor must prove that the facts were revealed to fall the social evaluation of a person in the case prosecuted for defamation by a false statement of false facts under Article 307 (2) of the Criminal Act, and that the alleged facts were not consistent with the objective truth and were false, and that the Defendant knew that the alleged facts were false, all the prosecutor must prove that the alleged facts were publicly known, and in this case, the alleged facts were revealed.