The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants are not guilty. They are not guilty. They are given public notice of summary of the judgment.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the members of the D Association, and the victim E is the chairperson of the said Association.

At around 10:00 on August 17, 2013, the Defendants jointly distributed to the G Company’s office located in the Heung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Chungcheongnam-gu, Cheongju, a fact that the victim did not commit sexual assault, sexual indecent act, or corruption, despite the absence of the fact that the victim committed such act, the Defendants distributed to approximately 30 members of the D Service Members, who were gathered by the Defendant B, a printed article stating “the victim has been working for the victim without having her chest sex assault, sex indecent act, corruption, etc., and has been working for the victim,” thereby impairing the victim’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts.

B. The Defendants jointly do so.

The date, time, place, Defendant B’s statement that “the victim has worked without her chesting violence and verbal abuse,” etc. prepared by Defendant B.

Defendant A distributed the printed materials such as the same as the foregoing, thereby impairing the honor of the victim by openly pointing out facts.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal did not have distributed each of the printed matter stated in the facts charged of the instant case (hereinafter “the instant printed matter”), and Defendant B did not agree to the distribution of the printed matter, although Defendant B did not prepare the printed matter.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found Defendant A to have distributed the instant printed matter and found Defendant A guilty of the instant facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

3. Determination

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the premise that, based on the evidence duly admitted and examined, the H’s testimony was reliable.

H The Defendant A, who promoted the removal of the victim, drafted a draft that would result in the Defendant A’s dismissal; Defendant B, who received the draft, produced printed materials through the computer work and brought them to the volunteer salking ceremony on August 17, 2013 (Investigation Records 36 to 38 pages); and Defendant A.