The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Although the comments written by the Defendant on the gist of the grounds of appeal can be specified as against victims E who suffered sexual assault, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged on the grounds that it is difficult to readily conclude that the victim expressed a destructive sentiment by specifying the victim.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The lower court determined that: (a) the article is a article related to the so-called “F”; (b) there is sufficient room to accept that: (c) the article contains the content that the police sent to the prosecution by non-prosecutions on the ground that there is insufficient evidence of sexual assault; (d) the content of the article contains the content that the victim’s statement was passive; and (e) the police’s statement was cancelled; and (e) there is sufficient room to accept that the independent police made a false assertion that the victim was sexually abused even after having sexual intercourse with the victim’s agreement; and (b) the article of this case presents a lot of comments to criticize the general women who were accused of sexual assault in the last time; and (e) there were several comments to the effect that the agreement on sexual intercourse should be strictly determined from the women’s standpoint; (b) it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant’s comments were referred to as a victim from the article of this case; and (c) the Defendant did not directly express the victim’s comments in front of the comments; and (c) it is difficult to conclude that the Defendant’s comments directly.

The above judgment of the court below is recorded.