The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal revealed the facts alleged by the Defendant, rather than “false facts,” and for the public interest, and thus, the Defendant cannot be punished as defamation. Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged in this case and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. We examine the following circumstances, i.e., the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, i.e., the second president of the C apartment council of occupants' representatives (hereinafter "the council of occupants' representatives of this case") to which the defendant belongs, H and I enter into a contract for appointment (hereinafter "the delegation agreement of this case") on April 30, 2009 without the consent of the occupants regarding lawsuits for compensation for damages substituting the defect repairs of the above C apartment, ii) the contents of the above appointment contract include the contingent fee agreement, and the above contingent fee agreement was paid at will. iii) The defendant, who was the third party council of occupants' representatives, terminated the delegation agreement with I, and the law firm I instituted a lawsuit to pay the contingent fee of this case, i.e., the sum of the contingent fee of this case, defect inspection expenses and litigation expenses before the appointment of the council of occupants' representatives, i.e., the victim was a special election of the council of occupants' representatives.