The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In spite of the misunderstanding of legal principles, the court below found the Defendant guilty by misapprehending the legal principles, even if the Defendant’s act was deemed to be true and solely for the public interest.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 1.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to Article 310 of the Criminal Act, in order for an act that defames a person by publicly alleging facts to be judged as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles to be punished, the alleged facts are related to the public interest when objectively viewed, and an actor also stated such facts for the public interest. Here, “public interest” refers not only to the public interest of the State, society, and other general public, but also to a specific social group or a group of its members, and also to the interest of the whole members. Whether it is related to the public interest or not shall be determined by comparing and comparing the various circumstances concerning the expression itself, such as the contents and nature of the alleged facts themselves, the scope of the other party to whom the publication of the relevant facts was made, and the method of expression, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 97Do88 delivered on April 11, 1997, 2006Do2074 delivered on December 14, 2007, etc.). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, around 13:00 on August 26, 2013, the Defendant: (a) received KRW 50,000 from the victim during his/her term of office as the president of the council of occupants; (b) spent expenses of KRW 10,20,00 for personal purposes; (c) spent expenses incurred in relation to business; (d) separately withdrawn expenses incurred in performing his/her duties; and (e) embezzled public funds by paying 20,000,000 won from the management expenses.