Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

On December 2, 2013, the Defendant presented the notice of the result of the instant accusation to D, the managing director, at the Seocho-gu Seoul apartment management office, and stated that “E became liable for a fine of KRW 1,00,000 as a result of obstructing the performance of duties.”

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim E by openly pointing out facts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the witness D;

1. The portion of the statement of witness E in the third public trial protocol;

1. F statement concerning the defendant in the protocol of interrogation of suspect against the prosecution;

1. Statement made by the prosecution with regard to D;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written verification of each fact of G, H and I, and a written additional statement of E;

1. A criminal investigation report (a report on ascertaining the details of the case that is an accusation);

1. The application of statutes on minutes, recording records, and public records of meetings of occupants' representatives;

1. Article 307 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 307 (1) of the choice of punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act stated in the facts charged, with the prior knowledge that the defendant would give the victim an official commendation at the representative meeting of apartment occupants (hereinafter "representative meeting of apartment occupants of this case") as stated in the facts charged, and the victim could not participate in the fact that the victim would be awarded an official commendation and the prize paid from the official commendation and apartment management expenses for apartment residents, so the victim could not participate in the same act as stated in the facts charged in order to prevent an erroneous commendation. Since the defendant's act of this case only for the public interest, the defendant's act of this case only for the purpose of the public interest, and therefore, it is argued that the illegality

However, in light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of this case, the Defendant’s words written in the facts charged do not contribute to the development of the above apartment, and thus, it is given official commendation.