정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,500,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal stated all the facts posted by the Defendant, and even though the purpose of slandering is not recognized as being for the public interest, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion
2. Ex officio determination
A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant of the Amendments to Bill of Indictment, the Prosecutor examined ex officio before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant of the Amendments to Bill of Indictment, and the facts charged in paragraph (2) of Article 2012 Highly 6686 of the facts charged by the Defendant “The Defendant, at the above place around 09:52 on March 5, 2012, connects the above F’s Blogs, after which the Defendant was inserted in the above Blogs, he resigneds from the above article’s comments on the article’s comments on the article’s “I’s comments on the I’s comments on the Blogs,” which read, “I’s comments on the I’s comments on the I’s comments,” and then, I’s remarks to enter the Flogs in order to instigate him to distort the spirit and instigate him.
“The Defendant, by openly pointing out the facts, damaged the reputation of the victim. From that time to April 6, 2012, the Defendant: (a) indicated in the [Attachment Table 1] Nos. 1, 3 through 10 between that time; and (b) indicated in the [Attachment 1] Nos. 1, 3 through 10, the “10 times” in the application for the change of the indictment issued on October 8, 2013 is an obvious clerical error of “9 times”. The Defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out the facts through the same method; and (b) has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts for the purpose of slandering the victim through an information and communications network; and (c) has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts for the purpose of slandering the victim through an information and communications network; and (d) at two times the number of offenses table (1) No. 2.