The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, rather than specifying the victim, posted a virtual situation in relation to the virtual figures, and thus, cannot constitute defamation against the victim.

2. Summary of the facts charged

A. On September 26, 201, at the Defendant’s house No. 00:27, Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Apartment 102 Dong 105, the Defendant openly damaged the reputation of the victim by inserting the false fact that “When one is a real estate business entity, he/she is a real estate business entity” by referring to the victim E at the free bulletin board of “Nber Kafa”. Rather, he/she made a false accusation that he/she was assaulting to the residents, but he/she did not have any intention. There is a lot of confusion and there is no possibility that the human being who unlawfully files a false accusation might not interfere with corruption in the course of his/her representative of the apartment management.”

B. Around 11:21 on the same day, the Defendant publicly damaged the honor of the victim by publicly inserting the false fact that “This human being is not aware of the fact that he is not guilty of a non-Subrogation, and instead of returning the remaining money to the residents, he voluntarily dissolveed, and instead returning it to the residents,” at the same place.

C. On the 28th day of the same month, the Defendant publicly damaged the honor of the victim by publicly inserting the false fact that “Isk-skin skin, Iskin, Isk-in, Iskin, Isk-in, Iskin, Iskin, Isk-in, Iskin, Iskin, Isk-in, Iskin,

3. In order to establish the crime of defamation, the lower court determined the following as follows: (a) although the victim’s act of publicly alleging a certain false fact exists; (b) however, there is no need to explicitly indicate a false fact; and (c) thus, the act of publicly expressing false fact that does not specify a