The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal - Fact mistake, misunderstanding of legal principles, and improper sentencing

A. The Defendant’s speech was made between C and C and 1:1 telephone calls, as well as there is no possibility of spreading in light of the relationship between C and the victim D, and it is difficult to recognize performance.

2) The Defendant’s remarks do not constitute “a statement of fact”.

3) The Defendant, when C delays the payment of royalties on the ground of legal disputes, made a statement as stated in the facts charged, and did not have any intention to impair D’s honor, and even if not, it is a justifiable act and thus ought to be dismissed.

B. Even if the court below found the defendant guilty, it is unfair that the sentence imposed by the defendant (the punishment amounting to five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. The facts charged and the judgment of the court below

A. On October 18, 2015, the Defendant, who was charged, damaged the victim D’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts by posting a phone call to C, which is the owner of B franchise store, and making a speech of the following contents.

1) The facts are that the trademark rights of the Company B, E, and F are victims D and the trial is underway on the existence or absence of the trademark rights, etc., but the Defendant, “The cost of developing the trademark rights is limited to the amount of money of Category B, and thus, the trademark rights were dismissed.

D had the same experience as the application for provisional disposition on trademark rights, but now the need to do so.

“......”

2) Although the facts were not prosecuted by the victim D, the Defendant was “A criminal prosecution” to C.

“......”

B. The lower court determined that each of the above crimes was concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined.

3. Determination on whether a deliberation was made

A. Ex officio determination 1) Criminal Litigation Act.