Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Defendant 1’s mistake of facts as to the guilty portion merely listened to the Defendant’s talking about the Defendant’s will and the victim, and did not directly harm the victim’s reputation, and there was no intention of defamation. Defendant 2’s punishment by the lower court of unfair sentencing (hereinafter “fine 500,000 won”) is too unreasonable.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts as to the portion of innocence), the court below rendered a verdict of innocence against the defendant, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding of facts.

2. Determination

A. The term “public performance”, which is the constituent element of the crime of defamation on the part of the Defendant’s conviction, refers to a state in which an unspecified or many unspecified persons can recognize. In a case where a person makes a statement by pointing out a fact in which an unspecified or many unspecified persons may recognize, thereby under Article 307(1) of the Criminal Act, defamation is established

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, it can be acknowledged that the defendant made a statement to the effect that "a dental and nurse has winded with her husband within the country," as a large interest of the majority of people, including F and G, in addition to the defendant's wife, who is the direct counterpart to the defendant's speech on the first floor where the victim's work-in-house department (hereinafter "the dental of this case"). According to the above facts acknowledged, the defendant made a statement to the effect that "a dental and nurse has winded with her husband within the country," and the defendant's intent of defamation is recognized.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

(b) reasons for the inspection;