3) New standard for determining “the public interest” Section 193 of the German Criminal Code prescribes that “critical opinions about scientific, artistic or commercial achievements, similar statements which are made to exercise or protect rights, or to safeguard legitimate interests, as well as remonstrations and reprimands by superiors against their subordinates, official reports or judgments by a civil servant and similar cases only entail criminal liability to the extent that the existence of an insult results from the form of the statement or the circumstances under which it was made.” The above provision guarantees the freedom of expression by regulating that such cannot be punished for criminal defamation, etc. if it is involved in the protection of the legitimate interest even if an infringer’s unlawful act does not concern the public interest. Considering the harmony of legislation cases such as Section 193 of the German Criminal Code or the recommendations of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights and the freedom of expression, the “public interest” stipulated in Article 310 of the Criminal Act ought to be also more widely recognized in cases of alleging genuine facts. In particular, considering that the concept of relevance to the public interest is changing with the times and public concern is also constantly changing depending on the circumstances, the relevance to the public interest should not be limited to public figures, systems, policies, etc. Accordingly, details of the facts alleged can be seen to have public interest if they are matters related to communal life with the other general public even if they are matters related only to part of the general interest of society, and, by extension, in the case where they are related to the public interest and gain social attention even if they are matters regarding an individual, the application of Article 310 of the Criminal Act should not be excluded on the sole grounds that they do not concern the general interest of the state and society or particular social groups. Even in the case of a private person, the relevance to the public interest ought to be determined in consideration of the nature of social activities associated with said person and the influence that said person has on society. F. Determination on this case 1) The reasoning of the lower judgment and the evidence duly adopted by the lower court reveal the following.