The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the penalty (a fine of 500,000 won) declared by the court below is too large.

2. Determination

A. Article 70 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., as to whether a person has a purpose of slandering a defendant requires the intent or purpose of a harm. The issue of whether a person has an intention of slandering a person ought to be determined by comparing and considering the overall circumstances, such as the content and nature of the relevant publicly alleged fact, the scope of the other party to whom the relevant fact was published, and the method of expression, etc., and the degree of infringement of reputation

(see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do4740, Sept. 25, 2008). Meanwhile, in a case where the alleged facts relate to the public interest, unless there are special circumstances, the purpose of slandering the alleged facts is to be denied. However, “where the alleged facts relate to the public interest,” the term “where the alleged facts relate to the public interest” should be subjectively expressed by the actor for the public interest, and should not be objectively seen from an objective point of view.

(2) On October 14, 2005, the court below held that the Defendant had continued to work in H even after the victim was aware of the fact that he had worked in H around the end of May, 2017 after he/she had quasi-rapeed the Defendant’s his/her married, and that the Defendant posted the instant text on March 16, 2018, which was the day following the first trial date for the victim. (2) At that time, the instant criminal trial continued to exist after the victim was requested to agree with the Defendant’s married, and the Defendant disclosed the name, etc. of the victim during the aforementioned criminal agreement and made the statement in its reasoning.