beta
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
Summary of Grounds for Appeal
With respect to attempted mistake of mistake of facts, the Defendant heard from F and D that he conspired with E to threaten the Defendant, and then brought a civil lawsuit against F, D, and E as a co-defendant on this basis, and there is no fact that the Defendant fabricated evidence in the process, and therefore, the Defendant did not intend to deceive the full bench in charge to acquire money from E and F.
With respect to defamation as of April 28, 2010, C Apartment Seniors Association did not pay fuel expenses continuously from August 2004 to May 2008, 2008, but did not collect fuel expenses on May 2008, because it was discovered that the C Apartment Seniors Association was forced to collect fuel expenses on one occasion, and it was true that E, the Chairperson of the Seniors Association, used subsidies by the Seniors Association. Thus, the Defendant did not indicate false facts.
With regard to the alteration of private documents in misunderstanding legal principles, the defendant tried to present the subsidy to a regular meeting of occupants' representatives in order to use it unlawfully, and there was no intention to modify the private documents.
Judgment
According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the attempted fraud on the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant can be acknowledged that the defendant brought a lawsuit against E and F to the effect that E and F would seek damages of 3.5 million won because E and F had instigated D without any objective grounds, and this is recognized by the above evidence. In addition, if the defendant repeats a lot of criminal complaints and civil lawsuits for a long period between E and E, that is, the defendant repeats a lot of criminal complaints and civil lawsuits for a long period between E and E, and the appraisal has significantly aggravated, the defendant can be acknowledged to have brought the lawsuit to acquire money from E and F, so the above argument by the defendant is without merit.
The court below is legitimate in regard to defamation of April 28, 2010.