The judgment below

Among them, the violation of the Public Official Election Act by publishing false facts in the attached list No. 13.

1. Of the facts charged in this case, in the case of Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, and 13 of the annexed list of crimes among the facts charged in this case, C, the father of the E candidate, provided a good to D

Notice of the fact that a candidate or E gives birth constitutes a statement of specific false facts about the candidate, etc., and, in the case of Nos. 4, 6, 12, 14, and 15 of the attached list of crimes, the E candidate becomes aware of the head or enters the seat of the E candidate.

or in favor of women in women's brushes

The judgment of the court below which acquitted all of the facts charged of this case on the ground that the notice, such as the son of pit as soon as possible, murdered by C, or received money from the G Savings Bank, constitutes a defamation against the E candidate, etc. by a statement of specific facts, but is not a statement of specific facts or merely an evaluation expression, etc., is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts or by misapprehending the relevant legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion related to the violation of the Public Official Election Act based on the publication of false facts, it is sufficient to say that the “fact” as referred to in the crime of publishing false facts under Article 250(2) of the Public Official Election Act means the report or statement on the specific past or present facts in time and space, and the content of the expression can be proven by evidence.

The distinction between a statement of fact or an expression of opinion or abstract judgment is not simply distinction by the term used, but rather by the legislative intent of ensuring the fairness of election, in mind, all circumstances surrounding such expression, i.e., the ordinary meaning and usage of language, in mind.