The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal did not confirm the facts at all, and the Defendant made a statement of considerable damage to the victim’s social assessment without confirming the facts, and even if the Defendant recognized that he had damaged the victim’s reputation by pointing out false facts as stated in the facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby having acquitted the Defendant.

2. Determination

A. On November 18, 2016, at around 23:00, the Defendant had not requested KRW 18 million under the condition that the victim D, the chairperson of the above apartment apartment unit, changed the above apartment elevator management method from FM to FM to E (hereinafter “instant company”). Although the Defendant had no knowledge of such fact from F, he and the employees of the above company were heard, the Defendant damaged the victim’s reputation by publicly pointing out that “The victim demanded KRW 18 million from FM to change the elevator management method from FM to FM method.”

B. The lower court’s determination 1) In order to establish a crime of defamation by publicly alleging false facts under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, the person who alleged the facts must be aware of such fact as false, and furthermore, if an act of damaging a person’s reputation by openly pointing out a fact is true and solely pertaining to the public interest, it cannot be punished pursuant to Article 310 of the Criminal Act. The term “justifiable fact” refers to the fact that the important part is consistent with objective facts in light of the overall purport of the content thereof, and there is a little difference between the truth and the truth or somewhat exaggerated expression.