The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. In light of the purport of the prosecutor’s appellate brief attached to the e-mail sent by the defendant to the union members, there is a specific false fact about the victim’s personal corruption, the transmission of the note en bloc to 160 union members different from the public interest purpose for the fact-finding, the fact of the victim’s misconduct is clearly stated, and the transmission of the note without confirmation of the fact prior to the commencement of the company’s fact-finding, etc., the defendant should be deemed to have the purpose of slandering the defendant. However, the judgment of the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment,

2. Determination:

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the amendment of indictment, the prosecutor held the prosecutor not guilty of the facts charged, while maintaining the existing facts charged as the primary facts charged, under the name of the conjunctive crime, Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, “Defamation” is a primary applicable provision, and under the judgment of the court below, the facts charged as guilty, and the part not guilty.

The judgment of the court below was no longer maintained since the subject of the judgment was changed by the court's permission to add each of the facts charged as the ancillary facts charged.

However, the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles concerning the facts that have been mainly changed in the trial of the political party is still subject to the judgment of the court of this Court, and

B. The summary of the first main charge of determining the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles with respect to the primary charge is the transmission by e-mail to approximately 160 trade union members, where the Defendant, using an internal communication network for the purpose of slandering the victim F.