정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)등
Of the facts charged in this case, the victim C and D corporation are not guilty. Of the facts charged in this case, the facts charged in this case are as follows.
1. On April 14, 2015, the Defendant: (a) connected the E apartment 417-104, Sinpo-si, Sinpo-si, to the “G” bulletin board of the Internet site; and (b) duly offered 2640,00 shares of the victim D Co., Ltd. purchased outside of the Internet site by the victim C; (c) even if the damaged party did not have any shares; and (d) the Defendant conspired with the Defendant to the effect that he purchased them from H outside of the country prior to the military gun in March 2015.
공 시한 264 만주를 아직도 가지고 있다면 반드시 거래 재개를 하겠지만 I 님 예측대로 만약에 그 264 만주를 허위 공시 했다면 주주님 들은 한마디로 낚인 것이 되겠지요 주식도 없는데 궂이 거래 재개 목숨 걸 일 없고 먹 튀하면 되니까요. 우선은 그 264 만주를 목숨걸고 지키고 있느냐,
whether there is interest only in an extended loan and advanced loan by J
In addition, from April 25, 2015 to April 25, 2015, the article written a false notice as shown in the list of crimes.
Accordingly, the Defendant had interfered with the victims' stock management work by publicly expressing false facts using information and communication network.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The arguments by the Defendant and the defense counsel ① The comments posted by the Defendant do not constitute the distribution of false facts in the crime of interference with business, since they are not all false.
In particular, the number Nos. 1 in the annexed crime list is merely a simple expression of opinion premised on the family situation. ② There was no intention to interfere with the work of victims by spreading false facts to the defendant.
(3) It is difficult to deem that the content of the duties of the victims stated in the facts charged is unclear and that such duties are protected by interference with business.
B. The prosecutor shall make a determination as to whether the business of the annexed Table 1 No. 1 was established.