beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.02.13 2013고정3249

모욕

Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who was working as a 108 executive department of “C Apartment Council” at a meeting of the prospective occupants of C apartment, and is a member of NAV Kafa D and an undisclosed user “E.”

The victim F is a person who had worked as the chairperson at the early stage of the above Council.

At around 14:22 on April 29, 2010, the Defendant connected the said carpet to “E” and distorted the victim by openly posting the “G” on the bulletin board “Free Dog” in a way that sees the people who do so so to the J (one-one), making it difficult for the Defendant to see the people in a way that sees the J (one-one name) so that they do not know of wrong and domination and vain so far. Any person who knows the method of listening in vain and considers the method of listening to the vabin, one-way, one-way, one-way, one-way, one-way, one-way, one-way, one-way, one-way, one-way, one-way, one-way, one-way, and another, the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A complaint;

1. One to four materials to be submitted by each complainant;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to reference documents submitted additionally by a complainant;

1. Article 311 of the Criminal Act and Article 311 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The Defendant alleged that “H” does not refer to “H” rather than “W” as the complainant, but rather refers to “large forest industry” (in particular, 9,10,70,74 pages of investigation records). However, in full view of the evidence in the judgment, “H” recorded by the Defendant refers to “H” rather than the large forest industry, and it is determined that other members who read the Defendant’s writing also knew of this.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal against the defendant is justified and guilty according to the evidence of the judgment.