The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant alleged misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine did not harm the reputation of the victims by openly pointing out false facts. In particular, as long as the Defendant sent text messages for the benefit of union members and its members in relation to criminal facts3 as stated in the lower judgment, the crime of defamation is not established.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or affecting the conclusion of judgment.

B. Improper argument of sentencing is unfair because the sentence imposed by the lower court (an amount of five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court rejected the above assertion by the Defendant on the misapprehension of the legal doctrine on factual mistake or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, on the grounds that the grounds for appeal of this case are the same as those for the instant appeal.

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, it is proper that the court below's determination that the defendant may sufficiently recognize the fact that he has damaged the reputation of victims by openly pointing out false facts as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below, and the evidence submitted by the defendant in the trial of the party alone does not interfere with the recognition of the facts constituting the crime

In addition, as long as the defendant defames the victims by pointing out false facts as above, Article 310 of the Criminal Act is applied and there is no room for excluding illegality (see Supreme Court Decision 99Do3213 delivered on October 22, 199, etc.). Accordingly, there is no error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as pointed out by the defendant.

Therefore, we cannot accept the Defendant’s mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

3. The age, career, background leading to the Defendant’s crime, method of punishment, record of punishment, and other records and records of this case, as stated in the judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing.