The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

The defendant does not pay the above fine.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1) There is no fact that the Defendant posted a letter of defamation C around October 19, 2013 and around November 21, 2013 on his/her page.

2) On November 20, 2013, the Defendant had no record of c at a volunteer office of the DNA Family Support Center around November 20, 2013.

Even if the Defendant was at the time of around November 20, 2013, when around C.

Even if it is intended to oppose C's assault, it constitutes legitimate defense or legitimate act.

B. The lower court’s punishment (2 million won in penalty) is too unreasonable in that it is too unreasonable to deem the sentencing to be unfair.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. 1) The summary of the facts charged of the instant case’s defamation is that “The Defendant is not a “public book in the Multicultural Family Support Center” written on the first page of his/her woman’s page around October 19, 2013, and all the “each of them” written in the indictment.

The phrase “no fact” ought to be interpreted as “no fact” (see, e.g., document 108, 113; document 108, see, e.g., document 108; see, e., document 108, e.g., document 108, “lanoi kh long” refers to “other than that.” The prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment to delete the part “public records at the Korean foreign language university” in the trial of the party and changed the facts charged

The study of the resume and qualification certificate of the Vietnamese C shall be conducted, and if any, contact with the Multicultural Center directly, or contact with the Vietnamese Embassy located in Seoul.

“The phrase” shall be published respectively, and on November 21, 2013, several parts of “Chhos” need to be inspected about the qualifications of the relevant seafarer.

by inserting the phrase “A”, thereby impairing C’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts.

"......"

2) The Defendant asserts that, around October 19, 2013 and around November 21, 2013, his/her country’s Facebook posted the words “the scope of his/her headquarters”, “the scope of his/her territory”, “the scope of his/her territory”, “the scope of his/her territory”, and “the

However, the court below is legitimate.