The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant written on September 7, 2015, the C church website around 08:28, 2015, with the title of “Unsatisfy and church democracy”, “part of the office members with respect to Dratfys who have made a lot of remarks to participate in the e-day Assembly,” and even if there is a de facto session, he also heard the criticism of “Satfy,” “I,” “I,” and “I,” “I,” even if there is a person who has made a lot of unsatisfying,” the Defendant also heard.

“The notice posted the content “......”

On the other hand, at the time, victims E did not attend as much as possible for personal reasons, and attend the meeting only for the expulsion, and the members who confirmed the Defendant’s notice were aware that the DNA collection company refers to the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by exposing public facts through information and communication networks with a view to slandering the victim.

2. Determination

(a) Crimes of non-violation of an intention (Article 70 (3) of the Act on Promotion of the Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc.);

B. The victim expressed his intention not to punish him after the prosecution of this case

C. Judgment dismissing public prosecution (Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act)