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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was the principal of the C University from around 1975 to March 2014, and the victim D was the principal of the C University from around 2012 to around 2012.

1. On August 17, 2017, the Defendant damaged the reputation of the complainant by openly pointing out false facts by stating that “In spite of the absence of the fact that the victim used or embezzled the money paid to the C University as an instructor’s tuition from the Asan-si E restaurant, the Defendant: (a) the 120 members of the C College who held the meeting at the said restaurant, who were members of the C College, of the C University, to receive KRW 10 million from the viewing of the said restaurant, and used the remainder of KRW 20 million for all members.”

2. On September 14, 2017, the Defendant damaged the victim’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts by stating that “In spite of the absence of the victim’s personal use or embezzlement of money paid from the ASEAN to the C University as an instructor fee, 112 members of the Cuniversity who held a meeting at the above restaurant, who were held a meeting at the above cafeteria, “low Doar Epic shall receive KRW 30 million from the viewing, and the remainder of KRW 20 million was used individually by all members.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel merely stated that the statement of passbook transaction, investigation report (the representative I and telephone conversations with H organization), investigation report (the person for reference and telephone conversation) and the statement that "the victim did not obtain permission, and did not deduct money from Agsan viewing in the name of C University without the certificate of completion of report." This only argues that the illegality is denied because it is true and publicly stated solely for the public interest.

However, the victim D is consistently from the defendant.