The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

On March 30, 2014, the Defendant: (a) at the Diplomatic Association where the Defendant in Scheon-si Co., Ltd was a pastor; (b) on the part of the said church’s believers 60 persons, the Defendant: (c) issued a medical certificate to the Victim E, stating, “I am well conducting our medical examinations every one year; and (d) thereby, “I ambibly,” which read, “I ambibly,” and read, “I ambibly,” thereby damaging the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out facts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of the statutes governing health checkups, Kaxo, recording records;

1. Relevant Article 307 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. A fine not exceeding 300,000 won to be suspended;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,00 won per day) of the Criminal Act for the inducement of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion of the defendant and defense counsel under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (the defendant has no criminal record for the same kind of crime, and all circumstances such as the process of occurrence of the case)

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant's statement in this case does not infringe the victim's reputation, since the defendant did not make a statement as to the name of the victim as stated in the facts charged (hereinafter "the statement in this case").

2. The crime of defamation does not necessarily require a person’s name to be explicitly indicated in order to establish the crime of defamation, and thus, if a statement of fact without a person’s name can be identified by considering the contents of the expression as a whole in light of the surrounding circumstances, it constitutes defamation against the specific person.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 82Do1256, Nov. 9, 1982). We examine the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, i.e., the statement of G, a new DNA, at the time of the occurrence of the instant case.