The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of misunderstanding the facts, the Defendant had access to the free bulletin board of the E University Internet site and prepared and posted the same writing as the entries in the judgment of the court below (hereinafter “instant bulletin board”) against the victim, but this is not false, and there was no purpose of slandering the Defendant.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The judgment of the court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the judgment on the grounds for appeal, prior to the judgment on the ex officio decision (revision of indictment).

A prosecutor applied for amendments to an indictment with the content that “However, the victim did not have any fact that he was frighting to teach post professors or inciting students and using teaching staff,” during the period between the 16th and 17th of the facts charged in the instant case, and the subject of the judgment by this court was changed upon permission. Thus, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained in this respect.

However, despite the above reasons for reversal of facts, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the evidence and witness evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and each court’s testimony in the trial of M, namely, ① the victim’s investigative agency, who corresponds to the facts charged, to the original trial, are not only specific in relation to the background of the instant crime, the content of the instant crime, and the fact that each statement from the victim’s investigative agency to the original trial, as well as are consistent and highly reliable, and ② the victim’s post-profolation among the instant comments, are shocked.