The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul Southern District Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. "At the time of public interest" as stated in Article 310 of the Criminal Code refers to the expression of the alleged facts relating to the public interest objectively from an objective point of view, and an actor also indicates the facts for the public interest subjectively.

Matters concerning public interest include not only those concerning the interests of the State, society, or other general public, but also those concerning the interest and interest of a particular social group or a whole of its members.

Whether a timely statement constitutes a public interest should be determined by comparing the following circumstances: (a) the content and nature of the relevant statement; (b) the scope of the counter-party to which the publication of the relevant fact was made; and (c) the degree of infringement of reputation that may be damaged or damaged by the expression (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do3912, Oct. 15, 2004, etc.). 2. The court below affirmed the judgment of the first instance court convicts the Defendants of the charges by rejecting the Defendants’ assertion of illegality on the grounds that it is difficult to recognize the Defendants’ act in the facts charged was related to public interest, on the grounds that it was difficult to recognize that the Defendants’ act was for the sake of public interest.

3. However, based on the reasoning of the lower judgment, the following circumstances are revealed.

(a) an individual’s private dignity is of the nature of his social activity; or