The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (i.e., posting a banner as stated in the lower court’s criminal facts, but the Defendant did not specify the victim’s name on the banner, and such act does not constitute an offense of defamation of reputation.

Domen, even if the defendant did not have the intention of defamation, and even if it is recognized that the defendant had the negligence of household affairs, the defendant's act constitutes a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Code, and thus there is no illegality.

B. Of the sentencing division, the sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) On June 6, 2015, the Defendant of the instant facts charged: (a) before the D religious E branch of D religious organization E branch located in Chungcheongnam-dong, Chungcheongnam-dong, Chungcheongnam-do; (b) Doing away from her own wpp, its private placement, and its sexuality, changed by means of a luxing and luxing a new wall; and (c) Doing away from her opening.

In a banner stating the content of “D religious organization E church”, the victim’s reputation was damaged by publicly pointing out the fact that the victim G, who is the sex of the said church, commits a theft of the said church by openly displaying the said banner on the Fpoter trucking vehicle in Defendant’s operation.

⑵ 판단 ㈎「 현수막에 피해자의 성명을 특정하여 기재하지는 아니하였으므로, 명예 훼손죄가 성립하지 아니한다」 는 주장에 대한 판단 명예 훼손죄가 성립하려면 반드시 사람의 성명을 명시하여 허위의 사실을 적시하여야만 하는 것은 아니므로 사람의 성명을 명시하지 않은 허위사실의 적시행위도 그 표현의 내용을 주위사정과 종합 판단하여 그것이 어느 특정인을 지목하는 것인가를 알아차릴 수 있는 경우에는 그 특정인에 대한 명예 훼손죄를 구성한다( 대법원 1982. 11. 9. 선고 82도 1256 판결 등 참조). 원심 및 당 심이...