The appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor shall be dismissed, respectively.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding the facts (the guilty part of the judgment of the court below) Defendant 1’s physical therapy E

In the event of a meeting, even though there was no warning that the chief of the division of the rehabilitation department would not be good, the court below recognized it based only on E’s statement that is not reliable, and even if the defendant made the above remarks, the court below acknowledged it based on E’s statement that is not reliable.

Even if there is no possibility of dissemination or performance for the third party.

Nevertheless, among the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of defamation against the victim D on October 2012, 201 and erred by misapprehending the facts.

2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (an amount of KRW 300,00) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The Defendant’s act of misunderstanding the facts (not guilty part of the judgment of the court below) to the C Hospital Head’s Staff H and the Nursing Steering Association I as described in the facts charged is likely to spread in light of the relationship between H and I and the victims, the content of the statement, etc.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of defamation around December 4, 2012 and of defamation around May 15, 2013, on the ground that it was insufficient to recognize the public performance of the Defendant’s remarks as described in the facts charged to H and I, while recognizing the fact that the Defendant made the said remarks to H and I as described in the facts charged, and committed a mistake of mistake.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) On the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the first instance court was clearly erroneous in light of the spirit of substantial direct and psychological principle adopted by the Criminal Procedure Act.

The credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court is determined in full view of the results of the first examination of evidence and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of the appellate trial.