The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant was the representative director of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”), and D filed a lawsuit seeking damages against the complainant, E and F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”), on the grounds that the complainant and G infringed upon D’s outboard plant variety right, and received a partial winning judgment at the Seoul Central District Court on September 30, 2010.

1) On November 9, 2010, the Defendant rendered a judgment that on September 30, 2010, the Seoul Central District Court Decision No. 13 of the Seoul Central District Court rendered that on September 30, 2010, the sales of non-indicted seeds by Defendant F (S) J and Defendant E (K) constituted an unlawful act that infringes D’s MM variety right, G and E shall pay additional KRW 700 million, and E shall not additionally pay KRW 200 million as damages, and in the future, they shall not reproduce, produce, prepare, sell (transfer), lend (transfer), or export or exhibit for that purpose.

Sale of the Act, the J, etc. is an illegal act that infringes upon M's plant variety right.

In the future, G shall not sell J, and such sale is illegal in violation of the court's ruling.

Therefore, since purchasing, selling, or cultivating a variety is also an act of taking advantage of the infringement of D's M variety protection rights, a variety of shares of farmers should not purchase or cultivate the J's seeds.

In the advertisement of the contents "", the complainant has damaged the reputation by openly pointing out facts.

2) On November 16, 2010, the Defendant, under the name of D, to “O newspaper” located in the Sung-gun N in Seongbuk-gun, Seongbuk-do.