Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who has operated a company that produces and supplies electronic bed devices with the trade name of "B".

On August 5, 2015, the Defendant opened a website of “D” (Domer E) on the C Portal Site and disclosed the price of the product factory that has been supplied to the Fund for the Settlement of Disputes in addition to the electronic products photographs sold by the Fund for the Settlement of Disputes.

"The price of the consumer is KRW 990,000,000

In addition, whether the words are the ones.

20 Ma30,00

The factory price is 150,000 won.

It is the product that has been supplied to the KCABF in order to be disclosed.

However, this company became aware that it is an illegal multi-stage enterprise.

Since the direct sales mutual aid association, the extraordinary sales mutual aid association, or the extraordinary sales mutual aid association is not a company, consumer damages are not compensated.

In addition, I have deceiving consumers as if they were developed and produced in the F.S. Bank of Korea.

Do-do-Mara

We belong to our company and are selling future products in car damaged car.

“The article posted the content of this case.”

However, since the defendant company did not develop the electronic intrusion independently, but developed jointly with the victim, the victim did not deceiving the consumer as if the damaged person developed and produced the product was developed and produced by the company operated by the defendant.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the duties of the victim by using a deceptive scheme that spreads false facts in the above manner, and at the same time, damaged the honor of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

The prosecutor prosecuted the crime of interference with the duties of the prosecutor and the crime of defamation. However, one act that spreads false facts constitutes not only the crime of interference with the duties by spreading false facts but also the crime of defamation by publicly alleging false facts, and both are in an ordinary competition relationship (Supreme Court Decision 2007Do7140 Decided November 15, 2007).