We reverse the judgment of the court below.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 7.7 million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Reasons for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In the instant building between the Defendant and the victims, the lessee may speak in another legal dispute later due to disputes over the fourth floor of the instant building, and thus, the Defendant stated the fact for the public interest purpose of preventing the damage of the lessee by notifying the lessee of the legal dispute between the victims and the Defendant. As such, the Defendant did not have an intention to defame the victim in fact, or the illegality is dismissed.

B) Under the premise that the Defendant had the lien of 407 among the instant building, the Defendant was in the lawsuit seeking the return of relics to victims up to now, and the Defendant was in an unclear situation where there was no lien for the Defendant, and thus, there was no false perception or intention in the obstruction of business due to false accusation, defamation, or false distribution, or for the public interest purpose of informing the lessee of the danger. Therefore, illegality is dismissed.

2) Each sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (No. 1: fine of KRW 7 million, and fine of KRW 700,000: fine of KRW 700) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence No. 1 of the Prosecutor (7 million won in penalty) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the prosecutor prior to the judgment.

The first and second court sentenced the defendant to each of the above fines after completing a separate deliberation of the defendant's crimes, and sentenced the defendant to each of the above fines. The prosecutor filed an appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance against the judgment of the court of first instance, and this court decided to concurrently examine the above appeals. Each of the offenses against the defendant in the judgment of the court below against the defendant is in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one of the offenses against the defendant should be sentenced within the scope of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes under Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be reversed.