The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan District Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The term “statement of fact” in the crime of defamation means a concept substituted by an expression of opinion containing a value judgment or evaluation, which means a report or statement on the time and spatially specific past or present facts, and its contents can be proved by evidence.

In distinguishing between facts and authorization of opinions, determination should take into account the ordinary meaning and usage of the language, possibility of proof, context where the language at issue was used, social situation where the expression was made, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Do2956, Mar. 24, 1998; 2007Do1220, Oct. 9, 2008). 2. The summary of the facts charged in this case is that the Defendant was a victim upon the Defendant’s recommendation on the Internet community, and that the Defendant was a member of the above community, C, and E, “D” to the above community, a member of the above community, was caught by a lot of accident in Busan, and caused damage to the victim’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts.

As to this, the lower court affirmed the first instance judgment convicting Defendant 1 of the facts charged on the ground that the above remarks by Defendant 1 on the premise of the victim’s past behavior is not merely an expression of opinion but an expression of false facts.

3. However, the lower court’s determination is difficult to accept for the following reasons.

A. The record reveals the following facts.

The Defendant jointly managed the F in F’s Internet community “F” established in B’s website I with B.

The E, a F member, invited C to F, which is a F member, and C and the victim were admitted to F by inviting victims.

The defendant is E.