명예훼손등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.
1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles or factual errors);
A. The facts alleged by the Defendant as to defamation are true and the intent of the Defendant is for the public interest of the whole occupant of the apartment, and thus, it is not unlawful under Article 310 of the Criminal Act.
B. As to the damage and damage of documents, among the facts charged in the instant case, the damage and damage of the property by the Defendant, which occurred in the trial of the prosecutor, constitutes a “documents” subject to the protection of the crime of causing damage and damage of documents, since the damage and damage by the Defendant is a leaflet where the source of slandering the Defendant cannot be known. Even if not, the Defendant’s act
2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by authority, the Prosecutor deleted the damage and damage of documents among the facts charged in the instant case, and applied for amendments to the indictment to delete the Victim G and F from the defamation of the victim G and F. This Court rendered a decision to grant permission on January 17, 2020.
However, since the damage of the document of this case and the damage of defamation are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, deletion of the damage of the document of this case constitutes revocation of prosecution which is not allowed in the appellate court because it withdraws part of the facts charged.
Accordingly, this Court decides to revoke and reject the decision of the court that permitted the modification of a bill of amendment to the effect that the prosecutor's above application for modification of the indictment is deleted.
On the other hand, the prosecutor's application to delete the FF of the amendment of the indictment constitutes a legitimate amendment of the indictment that can be taken in the appellate trial because the application constitutes partial withdrawal of the facts charged in relation to defamation and commercial concurrence with the victim G and thus, the decision of permission should be maintained as it is.
Therefore, the above prosecutor.