명예훼손
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. Of the facts charged against the Defendant in the summary of the grounds for appeal, the insulting part of the facts charged cannot be recognized as a balance of the legal interests of the means and methods of expression, urgency, and supplement. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which is assessed as a justifiable act that does not contravene social norms, and even if the principal motive and purpose of defamation are not for the public interest, it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that affected the conclusion of the judgment
2. Determination:
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the bus engineer of the victim C who is the representative director of the victim C (hereinafter “D”) and is the president of the EMF headquarters G branch. ① Defation: the Defendant up to February 15, 2012, the Defendant up to February 28, 2012, posted a banner of “D” with the contents of “the victim” as the citizen’s goods, and up to February 15, 2012, the Defendant spreaded a banner of “the victim’s reputation” with the content of “the victim’s reputation” with the content of “the victim’s reputation”, “the victim’s reputation” with the content of “the victim’s reputation was damaged by publicly pointing out the fact that the victim’s reputation was damaged.”
B. The lower court’s judgment and the review of the lower court are as follows: (i) the portion expressed as “a malicious business owner” and “labor pressure” among the placards attached by the Defendant among the placards attached by the Defendant is likely to damage the social assessment of the victim’s personal values; (ii) however, D was a labor-management conflict due to unfair dismissal, wage delay, etc.; and (iii) the Labor Relations Commission took a disciplinary action for 50-day suspension against the Defendant by the victim.