The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The Defendants are not guilty.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The details written by the Defendants’ misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles are merely an expression of opinion accompanying in the process of protesting against the sending of the victim G pastor to the temporary president of the E church without going through due process, and do not constitute a false fact even if some specific facts are publicly stated.

In addition, the illegality of the procedure dispatched to the temporary president and the qualities of the victim as the chairman of the party branch are about the public interest of the members of the E church.

Defendant

B did not aim to defame the victim G pastor.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby convicting each of the charges of this case.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendants are members of “F” as the E church believerss located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, and the victims G are those who were dispatched to E church from the H Assembly of the Korea War on June 23, 2012 to the E church at the K Assembly of the Korea War Veterans Association for the religious order which is the upper order of the church.

The Defendants did not recognize the victim as the temporary president of the party concerned without recognizing the victim as the temporary president of the party concerned, and did not recognize the victim as the temporary president of the party concerned, the Defendants found the victim as the victim's members such as I who recognized the victim as the temporary president of the party concerned and decided to request the victim to withdraw his/her strike by finding the victim as the victim's temporary president of the party concerned who resolved to send him/her to the E church.

A. The Defendant’s defamation was committed by the Defendant at K church at the time of the No. 35, Jun. 25, 2012, at the time of the No. 30, 2012, with the view to the fact that, in the case of embezzlement of KRW 43,00,00, which occurred from L church, there was no other victim’s participation. In the case of M church, N pastors, who are the pastors of M church, dominates of the M church, pursuant to the church constitution.