beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.09.09 2016고정1488

모욕

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case was set up by the victim D (the victim 56 years old) at the office of the C&A partnership located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government around October 3, 2015, for the reason that he/she prepared to hold an extraordinary general meeting for the redevelopment promotion, at the office of the C&A partnership located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government around October 19:0, the Defendant is not a person who uses the victim’s “if he/she drinks, fats, fats, fats,” on the job where there are several members.

person, on the face of entry, a false statement, a child himself/herself or herself

왜 동네주민들 남의 거까지 꿀꺽 할라고

The victim publicly insultingd the victim, stating "I Don,".

2. The offense of insult under Article 311 of the Criminal Act is an offense of legally protecting an external reputation, meaning a social evaluation of a person’s value, and the offense of insult referred to in the offense of insult refers to the expression of an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that may undermine a person’s social evaluation without stating any fact (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do229, Sept. 10, 2015). Therefore, if a certain expression is not likely to undermine the other party’s social evaluation of the other party’s personal value, even if such expression was expressed in a somewhat exceptional manner, it cannot be deemed as constituting the element of the offense of insult.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, in the course of protesting against the victim at the office of the redevelopment and consolidation project association, the defendant and its members including the defendant are recognized as having discussed the same opinion as the facts charged.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the above facts and evidence, i.e., the Defendant’s remarks, in the course of a conversation with the victim on the redevelopment, are against the victim’s efforts to promote the redevelopment of the victim’s remarks by making the victim’s remarks false or opposing to the redevelopment.