모욕
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. Taking into account the following: (a) the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles); (b) the opening period of a group-raising room is short; (c) the Defendants did not share explicit intent to maintain confidentiality; (d) the victims’ negative appraisal is likely to share; and (e) the Defendants engaged in hosting at a public place; and (e) the Defendants’ act was recognized as a performance and at least had dolusent intent thereto.
must be viewed.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted each of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles.
2. Determination
A. In light of the following circumstances, the lower court determined that: (a) the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was insufficient to support the Defendants’ performance in each act indicated in the facts charged; or (b) the Defendants had the intent to have the possibility of public performance or dissemination even if the Defendants did not do so at the
It is insufficient to view it, and judged not guilty on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge it.
1) The Kakao Stockholm, in which the Defendants posted each of the instant text, was opened solely for the purpose of dividing only the Defendants’ dialogue, and in principle, third parties cannot see the contents of the conversation, and the content of the conversation is not expected to be disclosed to third parties.
2) The Defendants, as a staff member of a very closely-friendly workplace with the interest of the victims, shared with a good appraisal of the victims of the victims of the disaster, and as such, the Defendants divided their conversations with their descriptions of scarnations room by posting them closely to the victims of the victims’ s scarkas room.
Therefore, there was no possibility that one of the Defendants could spread the content of the article posted by another Defendant to a third party.
On the contrary, the Defendants want to inform the outside of this conversation.