정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)등
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.
When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.
Punishment of the crime
The defendants are members of the Gyeonggi-do D Council.
On September 17, 2014, the Defendant, at around 22:00 on September 22, 2014, at a restaurant operated by the Victim F (60) located in E, had the desire for the President of H while the 15 residents are kept at the meeting of the Residents' Self-Governing Council meeting held by the head of G Dong while the 15 residents are able to take care of the president.
The victim of the lusical defect, “this Chewing ......” publicly insulting the victim.
Summary of Evidence
1. To state part of the witness F in the second public trial record;
1. Determination as to the assertion of the defendant and defense counsel stated in the witness I in the second public trial protocol
1. The defendant and his defense counsel filed a complaint against the part concerning the crime of defamation against the Act on Promotion of Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc. among the facts charged in the instant case, and did not file a complaint against the part concerning insult. Since insult is an offense subject to victim's complaint, the prosecution requirement is not satisfied unless
The argument is asserted.
On the other hand, a complaint in an offense subject to victim's complaint may be filed in writing as well as in writing with a person having the right to file a complaint who reports the crime to the investigation agency and seeks punishment for the offender. However, although a public prosecutor or a judicial police officer who received an oral complaint prepared a protocol, it does not need to be an independent protocol, and in a case where the investigation agency examines the person having the right to file a complaint as a witness or a victim, the statement contains an expression of intent demanding punishment for the offender, and if the declaration of intent is recorded in the protocol, the complaint is lawful (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do4451, Jun. 24, 201). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the victim did not submit a written complaint as to the offense subject to victim's insult, but the police officer did not have the right to file a complaint.