The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (based on factual errors and misapprehension of legal principles) determined that G is in a friendly relationship with E, a complainant, and thus, there is no possibility that G would spread a statement that impairs the reputation of the complainant (hereinafter “instant statement”). However, if G was the complainant, there is no reason to criticize the complainant, and actually spread the instant statement to the complainant via G.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles on the possibility of radio waves, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The lower court determined: (1) around June 19, 2009, prior to the occurrence of the instant case, G heard the Defendant’s statement about the contents of the Defendant’s above statement while making telephone conversations with the complainant on the same day with the Defendant, F University’s prizes, instructors H, students I, etc. from among the Dos that provide meals with the Defendant at the D-F University’s shop, which is the same as the place of the instant case, before the occurrence of the instant case; and (2) upon examining the recording record of the conversations with the complainant at the time, G, “A,” “A, from the beginning, a professor, shall write a false statement,” “A, from the beginning,” “I shall make a false statement about the fact known to the Defendant,” and “I shall make a false statement about the Defendant at the time of this case’s interview,” and “I shall make a false statement about the Defendant at the time of this case’s request,” and “I shall make a false statement about the Defendant’s statement to the Defendant.”