명예훼손
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. 1) When considering the circumstances, etc. at the time of the Defendant’s remarks, the Defendant’s remarks are not recognized to constitute an offense of defamation, since the Defendant’s remarks are not recognized.
2) The Defendant did not have awareness that his statement was false.
3) The Defendant’s statement constitutes a justifiable act that does not go against the social norms.
B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts
A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as to the assertion on performance, and ① the Defendant continued to have a sound as described in the facts charged, in the vicinity of the victim C’s residence from April 21, 2017 to 01:00 the following day. ② The place where the Defendant was so sound is located near the village entrance where the victim was living, and the Defendant is at the place where many and unspecified persons are expected to pass away from 10 to 20 meters away from the residence, and ③ the Defendant continued to make the above remarks despite the warning of the victim to file a complaint due to the crime of insult and the police officers dispatched after receiving the victim’s report, the Defendant’s speech was made in a state of unspecified or many unspecified persons, and is deemed to have a public performance.
Recognized.
This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.
B. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as to the assertion regarding false awareness, ① the victim and D, the parties to the Defendant’s remarks, consistently denied the relationship with respect to inhumanity or the deceased E before the instant case, ② Nevertheless, the Defendant believed that “the victim and D” were to go together with the victim, and there is an objective objective statement.