The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

B The defendant A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000,000.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B only prepared the documents indicated in the facts charged in the instant case as Defendant A was not a legitimate act, and there was no conspiracy with Defendant A, and there was no fact of spreading the said documents, Defendant A convicted Defendant B of the charge of obstruction of business and defamation. Defendant A knew that the victims did not have legitimate management authority at the time of preparing the said documents, and there was no awareness about the false facts to Defendant A. As such, Defendant A did not have an intention to spread false facts and spread the said documents without intention to harm the victims’ honor or interfere with their business. Therefore, Defendant B was merely the difference between the fact and the fact that the victims took measures unfairly before the victims obtained management authority. However, Defendant A was found guilty of this part of the facts charged, by misapprehending the legal principles on the seizure and collection order as at the time of preparing and submitting the list of property at the time of the violation of the Civil Execution Act, and the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the intent of the Defendant A or by misapprehending the legal principles on the non-payment of the deposit deposit.

B. Each sentence (Defendant B: a fine of 700,000 won, Defendant A: a fine of 1 million won) imposed by the lower court on the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendants by authority is ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendants, and '1.B against the Defendants when the prosecutor was in a trial.

Many parts of the charges of defamation and obstruction of business are D's containers.