beta
(영문) 대법원 2020.12.10 2020도11471

정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 70(2) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (hereinafter “Information and Communications Network Act”) provides that “a person who defames another person by openly exposing false information through an information and communications network with intent to defame the person shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than seven years, suspension of qualifications for not more than ten years, or by a fine not exceeding 50 million won.”

In order to establish an offense pursuant to this Regulation, it is necessary to recognize that the fact that the defendant disclosed openly is false and that the fact is false, as well as to slander the person.

Whether there is a purpose of slandering or not is false or separate from the fact that the defendant predicted, and the fact that the defendant predicted is false is not naturally recognized as a purpose of slandering.

In addition, the prosecutor bears the burden of proof of all the elements of a crime in this Regulation.

The term “purpose of slandering a person” means requiring the intent and purpose of a perpetrator, and the existence of the purpose of slandering a person ought to be determined by weighing and balancing the degree of infringement of reputation damaged by the expression, taking into account various circumstances such as the content and nature of the publication, the scope of the other party to whom the publication of facts is made, and the method of expression, etc.

The purpose of “non-disclosure” is contrary to the direction of the actor’s subjective intent, as it is for the public interest, and thus, the purpose of slandering is denied unless there are special circumstances.

In this context, the term "in a case where the hidden facts are related to the public interest" refers to the public interest when objectively seen, and the perpetrator also subjectively up such facts for the public interest.

Whether the facts relate to the public interest or not is defamation.