All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants’ act of misunderstanding facts does not constitute the crime of defamation, since the victims were not specifically identified in the timely content.

B. Since the contents of the Defendants’ misunderstanding of the legal doctrine are for the public interest, illegality is excluded pursuant to Article 310 of the Criminal Act.

(c)

Sentencing of the lower court’s punishment (Defendant A: 1 million won, Defendant B, C: each of the 2 million wons, Defendant D, E, and F: each of the 3 million wons, 3 million won, respectively) against the Defendants is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The Defendants asserted that the victims were not specifically identified in the lower court, and the lower court determined that the victims were specified on the following grounds.

① At the time of publication of each of the instant articles, the Victim L was a civilian status as an external contractual position in the 29-year-old usfk N at the usfk headquarters, and developed Ma in the 2007-old Ma into the annual relationship. After completing the marriage report on December 17, 2009, the Victim L was raising each marriage ceremony in Daegu around 201, and around April 8, 2013, the Plaintiff was raising 1-year-old son at the time of publication of each of the instant articles by giving birth to children around July 8, 2014.

In this regard, in the article of August 15, 2015, J and P were Korean husband with respect to "RC" indicating the victim L, developed into the first relationship with only one year around July 2007, reported marriage in 2009, reported marriage in the United States in 2013, and made marriage marriage in the United States in 2013, and had the side of one year.

At the same time, a photograph of victim L was posted.

In addition, on September 2, 2015, K reported the marriage in 2009 with respect to the "RC" indicating L of the victim in the article of the article of the article of the first day of September 2, 2015, and the marriage was reported in 2009, and the marriage was sexually formed in 2013, and gave birth to his/her father on July 2014.

The reference was made.

On this issue, L is used in the court below's decision.