Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On August 27, 2010, at around 16:45, the Defendant openly damaged the honor of the victim by publicly expressing the false fact that “The victim E (the 60-year-old) is a person who drinks at a cooperative’s end, drink, and the low person who was hospitalized in the hospital by going beyond his/her hand, even if he/she gets out of the hospital,” in front of 10 the D Distribution Center merchants in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on witness E's partial statement;

1. Article 307 (2) of the Criminal Act and the choice of a fine concerning the crime;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The portion not guilty under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. Around June 2013, the Defendant: (a) called the D Distribution Center located in Gwangju-gu, Gwangju-gu, by phone calls to G; and (b) “E is a impule that removes KRW 90,000,000 for commercial buildings; (c) is bound to the president of the association to not pay the cost of removed commercial buildings; and (d) the association was placed in the bankruptcy border; (c) as the chief director, sought KRW 28,000,000 for additional charges that he/she would have become the head of the association, thereby openly impairing the victim’s reputation.”

2. Although evidence in line with the above facts charged has a statement in E’s court and investigation agency, it is difficult to believe it as it is in light of the witness G’s legal statement, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

In addition, the Defendant and the witness G made a statement by telephone that the Defendant “E sought additional charges of KRW 28,00,000” to the said witness. However, even according to the witness E’s legal statement, the said money can be recognized as having been returned to E in the course of the settlement of the sales price for commercial buildings, so it cannot be said to be false.

Thus, the above part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, and it is in accordance with the latter part of Article 325.