The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not have awareness of the fact that there was no perception that there was a false fact inasmuch as he thought that the female in the photograph was the victim.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination on the assertion of mistake of fact 1) In determining whether the facts alleged in the crime of defamation by a statement of false facts under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act are false, if the facts alleged in the crime of defamation by a statement of false facts are different from the truth or are different from the degree of a somewhat exaggerated expression in the contents in light of the overall purport of the alleged facts, it shall not be deemed false, but if the important parts are not consistent with the objective facts, it shall be deemed false.

B. In light of its nature, it is difficult to determine whether an actor knew of the fact that he/she was false or not, in light of its nature, by comprehensively taking into account various objective circumstances, such as the Defendant’s educational background, career, social status, timing of publication, and anticipated ripple effect, based on the content of the published fact, the existence and content of the materials, the source and awareness of the fact that the Defendant revealed, etc. In addition, the intent of the crime includes not only the conclusive intention but also the so-called dolution intention, which is the intention to recognize the occurrence of the result, and thus, the crime of defamation by alleging false facts also constitutes an intentional act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do12430, Mar. 13, 2014).