The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant believed that the content indicated in the article posted on the outside bulletin of “E” (hereinafter “E”) was true; (b) even if not, the Defendant believed that it was true; and (c) had reasonable grounds to believe that it was true; and (d) did not intend to inform the occupants of the apartment of Seoul Nowon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu I apartment complex (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”) of the truth; (b) there was no purpose of slandering; and (c) there was no illegality on the sole basis of public interest; and (d) the lower court convicted the Defendant of the charges of this case by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the grounds for

2. On July 7, 2014, the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case: (a) on the outside bulletin of Nowon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, 1502, published “E” for the purpose of slandering victims D, and (b) on the small column under the larger title of “F”, “G” and “F”, the content column, as the front line and exclusive line of the Chairperson of the Election Management Commission so far, were elected.

D CC concurrently serves as the Chairperson of the Senior Citizens' Association and the H President, and therefore, I could embezzled the biased election fraud and the election expenses in mind.

After preparing an article, 2,00 copies were published and put into the post by the I apartment household in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu.

However, there was no fact that the victim D had been elected with the intention of election fraud and the letter or embezzlement of election expenses due to the cross-section and the reading of the victim D.

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts through publications for the purpose of slandering.

3. Determination

A. In the case of being prosecuted for the crime of defamation by publication under Article 309(2) of the Criminal Act, the fact that the publication was false is proven by the prosecutor actively and there is no proof that the publication was true.