The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding and misunderstanding of the legal principles regarding defamation (1) all the contents written in the inducements as stated in the judgment of the court below, and this is written for the legitimate interests of the owners of D commercial buildings. Therefore, the defendant's act is deemed to be for public interest and thus the illegality is dismissed.

(2) Although it was true that the Defendant entered the insult in the printed matter as stated in the lower judgment, the above printed matter is identical to the printed matter as stated in the first instance judgment, and it cannot be punished as a crime of insult, separately from whether or not the crime of defamation is established, as it explicitly expresses the fact that the said printed matter is engaged in an unjust act by the merchant federation.

B. The sentence (one million won of fine) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. (1) In order to establish the crime of defamation by publicly alleging false facts under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act with respect to defamation, the criminal should publicly indicate the fact, and should have been aware that the publicly alleged fact impairs the people’s social evaluation, and should have been false (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Do4757, Feb. 25, 2000). In a case where the important part in this context is consistent with objective facts, there is a little difference from the truth or somewhat exaggerated expression in detail.

Although it cannot be viewed as a false fact, in determining whether it is a false fact, it should be determined whether it is an important part that is not consistent with objective facts by examining the purport of the whole contents of the alleged fact.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Do6322 Decided July 13, 2007, etc.). (2) In the instant case, the following circumstances are acknowledged by the evidence duly examined and adopted by the lower court.