The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, despite the fact that the Defendant, “E had assaulted F by assaulting F” on March 8, 201.

B. On March 201, 201, the Defendant did not say that “the Defendant was engaged in insurance processing with respect to traffic accidents paid by E,” and that the Defendant paid KRW 100,000 to the victim, so the Defendant’s statement is not false, but constitutes defamation, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

C. Around August 4, 2011, the Defendant posted a document with the same content as the facts stated in the facts constituting a crime in the lower judgment on August 4, 2011, but this constitutes a true fact that is not a false fact, which constitutes an official business of the chairman of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Commission, and thus has no intention to defame the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant’s act was against public interest, and thus, there is no illegality, the lower court convicting the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In order to establish the crime of defamation, it is required to make a statement of specific facts sufficient to undermine a person’s social reputation with intent to defame another person as a subjective element (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do2877, Oct. 28, 2010; Supreme Court Decision 83Do1017, Aug. 23, 1983). In order to establish the crime of defamation by publicly alleging false facts under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, the offender must publicly indicate the fact, and the publicly alleged fact may undermine a person’s social assessment.