beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.06.21 2017노8982

모욕

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) it cannot be ruled out that the Justice’s memory is not clear or that it may be confused with other comments, even after five years have elapsed since the notice of the facts charged in the instant case was posted; and (b) the victim consistently stated that the above notice was confirmed while continuing to file a complaint for another case around October 2016, and that the victim became aware of the facts constituting a crime and the offender committed around October 2016.

It is reasonable to see that the period of complaint does not expire.

I would like to say.

Nevertheless, the lower court determined that the victim was finally aware of the fact of damage on December 1, 2012.

The court below dismissed the public prosecution of this case. The judgment below erred by misapprehending facts or by misapprehending legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The lower court asserted that ① on December 1, 2012, 2012, on the consolidated bulletin board of the car page following the instant facts charged, a notice was posted as “I” under the victim’s name on December 1, 2012, and the content of the notice was transferred to the Defendant as stated in the instant facts charged; ② the victim could not deal with the computers at the time, and ② the management of the office staff J was entrusted with the following car page management; however, the J received instructions from the damaged party in the lower court’s court for each case concerning the management of the following car page, and only attempted the editing of the text to be posted by the victim, and it was not possible to post a notice without the victim’s instructions.

The testimony was made at the time of the instant case. The victim’s assertion that the victim’s assertion that he/she did not confirm the content of his/her written statement or the victim’s assertion was insufficient to believe, while the victim’s statement was not reliable, and ③ the victim’s victim’s commercial building for about one hour on December 1, 2012.