it can be seen to be public if there is a possibility to be propagated or disseminated to many and unspecified persons even if such act targets only specified individuals or a few persons.” (B) Whether there exists publicity ought to be comprehensively determined after considering the objective overall circumstances at the time of such act, including the relationship or status between the person who made the remarks and the other party or the victim, background and situation leading up to such conversations, details of the revealed facts, the manner and location in which the facts were revealed, etc., and examining whether the other party may propagate such facts to many and unspecified persons therefrom. Whether the facts were actually propagated after the remark may be deemed as a factor to be considered to determine whether the possibility of propagation existed or not, but the accidental circumstance such as whether the facts were actually propagated after the remark ought to be considered merely as a passive circumstance when determining whether publicity is recognized. Therefore, the possibility of propagation can be determined based on the objective criterion as mentioned above even in the case of following the theory of propagation possibility; a person who committed such act could fully predict whether publicity existed at the time of the remark; and neither the possibility of propagation can be determined on the sole basis of the other party’s intention of propagating the facts nor legal responsibility can be imposed based on the result that the facts were actually propagated. (C) Criminal defamation as an abstract endangerment offences has an intention of protecting the social evaluation of an individual’s reputation regardless of the truth thereof, and the alleged facts ought to be concrete to the extent of intruding into the social evaluation of a specific person, but being in danger of causing an infringement as above is sufficient and the result of the infringement is not required, and thus the case where many and unspecified persons entered into a state of being able to recognize as a result thereof even if facts are alleged to a small number of persons as well as the case where facts are revealed to majority of persons can be interpreted as publicly alleging facts. (D) The theory of propagation possibility can be seen to accord with the concept of publicity as referred to in various forms of defamation punishment regulations including an information and communications network, etc. Most intentions are expressed and conveyed through an information and communications network including SNS, e-mail,