The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: (a) the Defendant, who became aware of the victim B’s introduction, sent a copy of the document prepared to the effect that “B was aware of the fact that C was a fraudulent act; and (b) caused substantial damage to many persons including the Defendant, by comparing B with the fraudulent act; (c) hereinafter “the document prepared to the effect that “B would have caused considerable damage to a large number of persons, including the Defendant, by openly pointing out false facts.” (hereinafter “the document in this case”).

2. As a constituent element of the crime of defamation, performance refers to “a state in which many, unspecified or unspecified persons can recognize the alleged fact,” and even if an unspecified or multiple number of people did not recognize the alleged fact, the reputation should be deemed to have been destroyed solely on the basis of such state.

However, in the factual case of a specific individual or minority, it can be a flexible circumstance in which the performance is denied, so there is a strict proof of the prosecutor about the possibility of dissemination.

An act such as delivering personal or private information to a specific individual or minority is not deemed to be a public performance.

However, even if it is factually about a specific individual or minority, if there is a high possibility or possibility of spreading or spreading to many and unspecified persons, it can be said that a public performance is made.

The existence of such a performance is objective at the time of the act, such as the relationship or status between the speaker (a person who expresses the facts) and the other party or the victim, the details and situation of the communication or conversation, the factual content at the time of the communication, and the method and place of statement.