The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At around 20:00 on June 24, 201, the Defendant attended a village conference held at the village community center (hereinafter “the first village conference of this case”) in the Jeonsung-gun E Community Center (hereinafter “the first village conference of this case”). As such, the Defendant’s testimony to the same effect does not constitute a testimony contrary to memory.

B. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court determined that the Defendant could fully recognize the fact that he did not attend the first village meeting of this case, considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated, namely, defamation cases against C, etc. (hereinafter “Maicheon District Court 2012DaMa813”), and the fact that G, D, H, etc. at the time of the first village meeting of this case was testified by the Defendant on the same basis that the Defendant did not have any attendance at the first village meeting of this case, and ② in relation to the participants of the first village meeting of this case, the list prepared by D and the list of the participants prepared by F, anywhere there is no Defendant’s name.

Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the records, the court below's fact-finding and judgment as above are just and acceptable, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of facts as alleged in the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

In addition, the above fact-finding and determination by the court below are justifiable even if the following circumstances revealed through the comprehensive review of the evidence mentioned above are observed.

C and D appeared as a witness in the court of the first instance, and the defendant testified that he did not attend the meeting of the first village of this case.

B. In the process of implementing the matters discussed at the first village conference of this case, village conference was held again on July 10, 201, and the second village conference of this case was held (hereinafter “the second village conference”).