All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, (1) K said that it was directly acting on the part of the Defendant, and there was no perception of false facts about the Defendant. ② The act of publishing the fact that the I candidate was acting on the part of KRW 150 million does not constitute defamation. ② The act of publishing the fact that the I candidate was acting on the part of KRW 150 million does not constitute defamation. ② The punishment of the Defendant (one year of imprisonment with prison labor and one year of suspended execution) sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant asserted that the facts of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles of the Defendant were the same as the allegations in the grounds of appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected the above assertion by providing a detailed statement of the decision.

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court (the statement of the effect of the witness as requested by the defendant in the trial, etc.), the judgment of the court below is justified.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the number of Twitter comments is less than 10 times, which does not affect the election, and that it does not constitute a crime of violating the Public Official Election Act, since he does not slander or take a bath against the candidate.

However, such circumstance alone does not interfere with recognizing the guilty of publishing false facts for the purpose of the instant abortion.

The above arguments by the defendant cannot be accepted in entirety.

B. The crime of this case’s assertion of unfair sentencing by both parties is published in Twitter a false statement on the part of the Defendant, when the 18th presidential election day is imminent, that the I candidate had paid KRW 150 million in relation to the issue of J, and the content of an interview with the same purport in Internet broadcast, thereby publicly announcing false facts for the purpose of the I candidate’s abortion, and simultaneously publicly announcing it.