Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. On October 5, 2012, the Defendant alleged the misunderstanding of the facts as to the false accusation, the Defendant suffered an injury by assault from F and G in the conference room of the militaryposi apartment (hereinafter “C apartment”) and the F and G, which he proposed by E, and on November 16, 2012, suffered an injury by assault from F and G in the C apartment center at the C apartment center, and on November 16, 2012, the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the charges by misunderstanding the facts, notwithstanding the absence of the fact that the Defendant did not know E, D, F, and G.

나. 명예훼손의 점에 관한 쌍방의 사실오인 내지 법리오해 주장 ⒧ 사실 적시에 의한 명예훼손의 점에 관한 피고인의 사실오인 내지 법리오해 주장 피고인의 행위는 오로지 공공의 이익을 위한 것이었으므로 죄가 되지 않음에도 불구하고, 원심은 사실을 오인하거나 법리를 오해하여 이 부분 공소사실을 유죄로 인정하였다.

In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to find out facts about defamation by Doz., even if the victim D’s embezzlement of KRW 4.5 million was recognized as false facts, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, by misunderstanding the facts.

C. The Defendant asserts that the lower court’s sentence (a fine of five million won) on the grounds of unfair sentencing by both parties is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the Defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. (i) On October 5, 2012, the lower court duly admitted and examined the following facts or circumstances acknowledged by the evidence and the records on the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts as to the Defendant’s non-determination of the charges; (ii) the Defendant was the chairman of the C Apartment Complex, who was a senior citizen center, but was not operated normally due to the Defendant’s departure from the senior citizen center.