The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles) the Defendant, without the purpose of slandering, posted a letter on the Facebook for the public interest only.

2. "Purpose of slandering a person" in the crime of defamation by using a judgment publication or information and communications network means the purpose of slandering a person, which requires an intention or purpose of defamation, shall be determined by considering the overall circumstances such as the content and nature of the relevant statement, the scope of the other party to whom the relevant fact was published, and the method of expression itself, and considering the degree of infringement of reputation that may be damaged or damaged by the expression, etc. In addition, it is in conflict with each other in the direction of subjective intention of the actor, which requires the intention or purpose of harm and is for the public interest (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do6036, Dec. 26, 2003). In light of such legal principles, as a result of a review by lawfully adopting evidence and closely comparing the records and examination conducted by the court below, it is not deemed that the major motive or purpose of the defendant was about the public interest, and that there was a purpose of slandering the victims.

The judgment of the court below which determined the person is just and acceptable, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the defendant in the judgment below.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, which is obvious that it is a clerical error in writing pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the Defendant’s appeal is corrected to change “a false fact” of Article 35(1) into “a