beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.09.09 2016노434

모욕

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

With respect to the original judgment dismissing the public prosecution against the charges charged as a crime of insult, the prosecutor made an application for change of the name and application of the crime, and the content of changing the law and the facts charged through lawful procedures, and permitted this by this court, and thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Articles 364(2) and 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment is again ruled after pleading as follows.

[Judgment to be used again]

1. The summary of the revised facts charged is as follows:

The defendant shall be the third chairperson of the meeting for the representative of apartment occupants in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

A. At around 11:00 on October 22, 2013, the Defendant, at the stairs, etc. of the E Apartment Management Office, received a protest against the removal of the rest place from the above elderly persons, and the Defendant, despite the fact that the victim F (F, 76 years old), did not have suffered from dementia, the Defendant, while there were apartment residents, including the elderly in the surrounding area, damaged the victim’s reputation by publicly alleging false voice with the victim, stating that “Mins or fat, fat, maintenance expenses, or fating, bating, or drinking,” while there were apartment residents, including the elderly in the elderly in the neighborhood.

B. On December 28, 2013, the Defendant: (a) at the E Apartment Management Office around December 28, 2013, the victim G (the victim G, the age of 65) tried to verify the details of the selection of the apartment guard company in the warden; and (b) among the employees and petitioners of the management office around the management office and civil petitioners, whether the victim “other Dong representatives are only and they do not know it with no knowledge.”

of this year, whether a year away from the president of the A.I.D. has been passed.

In the absence of such room, the number of years shall be well-beingd.

The victim’s reputation was damaged by openly pointing out facts through a large voice, such as “,” etc.

2. In order to establish a crime of scambling, scambling, or impairing honor, a simple abstract judgment or scambling, not a specific fact.