All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles as to the crime of the first instance judgment, which the Defendant posted on the Internet bulletin board as stated in this part of the facts charged, is not false.

② As to the facts charged of the second instance judgment (guilty guilty of the conjunctive charges), this part of the facts charged by the Defendant posted on the Internet bulletin board as described in this part of the facts charged does not constitute mere expression or opinion and does not constitute a statement of fact.

③ With respect to the facts charged in the first and second instances, the Defendant posted each of the instant facts charged (hereinafter “each of the instant text”) in the mind that the Defendant would no longer cause any other damage to the victim, without any interference with the business of the victim, with the intention of causing any further harm to the victim. As such, the Defendant had a purpose of slandering the Defendant.

shall not be deemed to exist.

2) The punishment of each court below (the first instance court: the fine of KRW 1 million; the second instance court: the fine of KRW 1.5 million); the fine of KRW 1.5 million is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

The Court held that each appeal case against the judgment of the court below was consolidated and tried, and that among the judgment of the court below, each of the offenses against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one punishment shall be sentenced pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal

Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

However, although there are grounds for reversal of authority above, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

3. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the judgment of the court below 1 as to the assertion that the defendant was not false (1) as to the assertion that the facts were not false (1) No. 1 of the judgment of the court below as to the assertion that the defendant was not false (1) No. 1 of the list of crimes in annexed Form 1 of the court below as stated in this part of the facts charged (hereinafter referred