All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The prosecutor (the judgment of the court below No. 1) made a statement as to the complainant in dialogue with D, which is a father-member of the E Geum-cheon District Office, as stated in this part of the facts charged. After that, the Defendant’s oral statement to F, who is the head of the site site of the same branch D, was transmitted the Defendant’s oral statement to F, which was recorded in the cell phone.

In doing so, the court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that there is no performance in relation to D and complainants.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the public performance of the crime of defamation or defamation, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The Defendant (the judgment of the court below No. 2) did not take a bath to the victim as stated in this part of the facts charged.

Even if the defendant had such a desire,

Even if at the time, the defendant's abusive theory is not performed because there was no guest or employee, except for the victim and the victim-friendly D in the car page.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misapprehending the legal principles as to the public performance of insult or thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Public performance refers to the state in which many and unspecified persons can recognize the public performance, which is a constituent element of the crime of defamation of reputation as to the prosecutor’s assertion, and the fact was disseminated to one person individually.

Even if there is a possibility that the crime of defamation may be disseminated to an unspecified or unspecified person, it shall be deemed that there is no performance to spread facts to a specific person if the requirement of performance is satisfied, but if there is no possibility to spread it against the contrary (see Supreme Court Decision 9Do5622, May 16, 200, etc.). Meanwhile, in cases where the public performance of the crime of defamation is recognized on the grounds of the possibility of dissemination as above, it is necessary to doluence as a subjective element of the elements of crime.