The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the prosecutor’s appeal - The defendant alleged the fact that the defendant alleged the fact is consistent and stated that there is no fact.

The Gyeonggi-do Human Resources Development Institute replys that it is impossible to verify B's renunciation of permission, and F's statement is difficult to believe that it is the defendant's dynamic fee.

With respect to B’s suspicion of intrusion upon residence, the prosecution made a disposition that there was no suspicion, and even in the case that the Defendant filed a complaint against B due to perjury, accusation, and destruction of evidence, the Defendant was exempted from all charges, and the conviction became final and conclusive by pointing out false facts as to the act on the Internet bulletin board as to the same fact as indicated in this case.

In full view of these circumstances, it is reasonable to see that the facts alleged by the Defendant were false, and there was an willful negligence on the fact that at least the alleged facts were false as the Defendant who was already convicted.

must be viewed.

However, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and affected the judgment.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor ex officio, the prosecutor examined the facts charged by defamation by publicly alleging false facts which the court below acquitted in the trial at the court below, and the prosecutor applied for the amendment of indictment with the content that "Article 307 (1) of the Criminal Act was added to "Article 307 (1) of the Criminal Act" as stated in the facts charged under the applicable law, and the subject of the judgment was changed by this court's permission. As such, the court below found the defendant guilty of the conjunctive facts charged, the court below could no longer be maintained.

3. The above determination on the assertion of mistake of facts should be made ex officio.