Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

From September 2012, the Defendant was a person who had been in office as C, Jung-gu, Seoul, as C, the first floor D.

On January 9, 2013, the Defendant written a letter to the effect that “The victim E, the former president, intentionally disturbs the order of commercial buildings in collusion with the neighboring merchants, and that “a state in which he/she embezzled approximately KRW 78 million in the name of the current operating council and files a criminal charge under the name of the current operating council” in the operation of the commercial operation committee, and then, the Defendant sent the above letter to F, G, H, I, and I, thereby impairing the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out facts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A criminal investigation report (Attachment of a criminal complaint E's transfer statement), investigation results (Attachment of a copy of a decision not to prosecute), and investigation results (Confirmation of whether there is a suspicion);

1. Details of postal items and copies of the decision not to prosecute;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Article 307 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The assertion and judgment of persons involved in the litigation under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant and his defense counsel stated the same facts as the facts charged in order to protect the interests of the merchants by ensuring that the operation of the commercial building of this case is normally achieved as the chairperson of the commercial building of this case, and that the illegality should be excluded in accordance with Article 310 of the Criminal Act.

2. An act of impairing a person’s reputation by openly pointing out a fact-finding is objectively related to the public interest that is alleged to be dismissed in accordance with Article 310 of the Criminal Act, and an actor should also indicate the fact for the public interest. Whether the alleged fact pertains to the public interest or not should be expressed in detail, the scope of the other party to which the publication was made, and the method of expression.