1. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 2,000,000 won;

2. If the defendant did not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On November 2012, the Defendant stated, “The Defendant, at the office of the resident representative committee of the Daejeon-gu Daejeon-dong-gu, Daejeon-gu, that 15 persons, including the representative of residents, were heard, such as the representative of residents, were called “to request money from a person who owns a building with a large number of buildings in tin; F was received to leave one destroyed son and one million won to G when tin was left, and the Chairperson was dismissed due to his improper marment.”

However, the victim did not demand money from the residents in the business area under the pretext of allowing them to receive a large amount of compensation, and there was no fact that the victim personally received 1 pos and 100,000 won from the F.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of the witness H, I and G;

1. Each police statement made to the F and J;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing respective certificates of fact by F and K;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 307 (2) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of penalties;

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

3. The defendant's defense counsel's defense counsel's assertion of the defendant's defense of the provisional payment order under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is alleged to the effect that the defendant's statement is true and is about public interest and thus illegal. However, according to each of the above evidences, the contents of the defendant's statement are judged to be false, so there is no room to apply the grounds for excluding illegality under

Therefore, the above assertion by the defense counsel is without merit.

The acquittal portion

1. On November 9, 2012, the Defendant, at around 20:30 on November 20, 2012, had the victim and the Si expenses were incurred while asking the victim, the vice-chairperson, the audit L, and the residents M want to change their total duties in the front place at the office of the “E Resident Representatives Council” of the Daejeon-dong-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City.