The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is recognized as defamation insofar as the defendant's statement about E is obvious that it is false and without properly verifying the authenticity thereof, and delivered it to other sectional owners.

However, the court below acquitted the charged facts of this case.

2. The lower court, without any reasonable doubt, proven that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, proves that the Defendant was false.

It is difficult to see

The decision was determined.

If the circumstances cited by the lower court differ from the circumstances cited by the lower court and the following circumstances were found based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated, the lower court was justifiable to have acquitted the facts charged in this part.

① On March 9, 2016, the C Commercial Building Management Group leased the part of the corridor of the first basement (hereinafter “the part of the official area of this case”) under the ground to F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”). On June 9, 2016, one of the owners of the C Commercial Building Partition filed an application for a disposition prohibiting the use of the part of the official area of this case against the victim and F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”).

The court accepted an application for provisional disposition on the ground that the lease agreement entered into with F on September 9, 2016 was essentially changed, but it did not go through a resolution of at least 3/4 of the separate owners and voting rights and violated the relevant statutes (i.e., investigation record 114-121). According to the purport of the above provisional disposition decision, F cannot exclusively use the portion of the public area of the instant case and cannot interfere with the use of other separate owners.

Therefore, from the defendant's standpoint, there is sufficient reason to believe that the victim who does not comply with the provisional disposition order is using the public area of this case at will.

assessment may be conducted.

(2) The defendant was entering the fourth floor of a commercial building.

Hand-phone stores are moved to one story underground, and other hand-phone stores are underground.