The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. On February 8, 2019, the Defendant posted a photographic file stating that “The reason for winning the judgment of the first instance court - the reason for winning the judgment of the attached facilities - the document forgery data of the modification of the self-governing rules,” as the title “the litigation relation between the user of the attached facilities and the user of the above commercial building” in the cooming room in which the members of the Da-B and the owners of the above commercial building participated.”

However, the victim did not have forged or arbitrarily changed the self-governing rules.

Accordingly, with the aim of slandering the victim, the Defendant revealed publicly false information through the information and communications network, thereby impairing the honor of the victim.

2. Determination

(a) Applicable provisions of Acts: Article 70 (2) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc.;

(b) A crime of failing to impose a penalty against an intention: Article 70 (3) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection,

C. After the prosecution of this case, a written application for non-prosecution of the victim was submitted.

(d) Judgment dismissing public prosecution: Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act;