The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In order to establish the crime of defamation by publicly alleging false facts under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, the statement should be deemed to be false, and the defendant must be aware that the statement is false in publicly alleging such facts, and the burden of proof for the criminal intent, namely, the awareness of such false facts, is the prosecutor.

(2) The court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged on the ground that it is difficult to find the Defendant guilty of the charges of this case on the following grounds: (a) the Defendant allegedly and repeatedly mentions the fact of corruption in G which was not verified in relation to the process of paying and refunding insurance proceeds to H, etc., a company employee, to report to the representative director of the company; and (b) it appears that the social evaluation of G would have deteriorated regardless of its authenticity by spreading the content to other employees; (c) the Defendant was aware of the fact that there was an interest of internal employees in the process of paying and refunding insurance proceeds to H, etc.; (b) the Defendant was expected to form a special investigation team by informing the representative director of the company with the fact that there was an interest of the internal employees in the process of paying and refunding insurance proceeds to H, etc.; and (c) the Defendant raised a suspicion of his own suspicion at such time; and (c) the investigation was conducted by the special investigation team thereafter; and (d) there was no evidence to find the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case.

In light of the above legal principles and records, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the recognition of falsity of defamation.

2. On the other hand, the prosecutor.