명예훼손
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In light of the misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (1) in light of the personal relations and overall circumstances of the victim and G, G cannot be deemed as having made it difficult for G to deem that the facts from the Defendant were true to have been reported to others than the victim, and it cannot be deemed that there was
(2) Meanwhile, in light of the following: (a) the text and photograph that D was actually received from the victim; (b) the statement that D was made at the time of the victim’s conversations with I; (c) the Defendant heard the contents of D’s currency from I; and (d) the victim’s ordinary character and behavior, etc., the Defendant believed that D was true; and (d) there was a considerable reason to believe that D was true at the time; and (b) the Defendant’s act conforms to the public interest, and thus, its illegality should be excluded.
(3) Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the grounds for public performance of defamation or the exclusion of illegality, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment
B. Even if a person is guilty of an unreasonable sentencing decision, in light of the Defendant’s statement circumstance and intent, the sentence of the lower court (the fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. (1) The public performance, which is the constituent element of the crime of defamation of the legal doctrine, refers to a state in which many and unspecified persons can recognize it, thus spreading facts against one person individually.
Even if there is a possibility that it will be disseminated to many and unspecified persons, the requirements of performance are satisfied.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do8155, Feb. 14, 2008). Moreover, in cases where the public performance of defamation is recognized on the grounds of the possibility of spreading defamation, there is dolusent intent as a subjective element of the constituent elements of the crime, and thus, there is a perception of the possibility of spreading.