The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds of appeal 1) The lower court’s determination that found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the grounds of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehending the legal doctrine is unreasonable.

(1) The content of the text message sent by the defendant has good reason to mislead the defendant as a fact or fact.

② The Defendant sent the text message to the victims for the purpose of reporting the text message that was sent first by the victims G and seeking advice from them, and there was no attempt to slander the victims.

③ The Defendant indicated specific facts on the ground that the Defendant did not put a decent expression at the end of the door sent in a text message and did not indicate it.

shall not be deemed to exist.

2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant also asserted the same purport in the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine.

Considering the circumstances cited by the lower court and the following circumstances found by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, it is justifiable to find the lower court guilty of the facts charged of this case.

① Although the text message sent by the Defendant was sent to the court or withdrawn the form of questioning the truth, the victims expressed their rights in light of the content and method of expression.

② In such a case, the main part of the Defendant’s text message ought to be deemed to be the expression itself, so if the fact itself is false, there is a question about it.

Even if there is a false statement of fact (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do5312, Nov. 27, 2008). Thus, even if the defendant simply delivered it after hearing the statement that the defendant had the above written indictment, the defendant publicly stated a false statement of fact insofar as the victims did not have any son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’

assessment may be conducted.

(3)