정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A1) The words as indicated in the judgment of the court below are the same as that of Defendant A’s written confirmation of facts, and the preparation of a written confirmation of facts with the same contents was made only before H to correct a violation of the regulations on real estate brokerage business ethics, so there is no performance. In addition, Defendant A did not have an intent to make false facts because the person who made such words to F was the victim, and Defendant A did not have an intention to make false facts, and Defendant A cannot be said to have damaged the victim’s reputation.
2) Even if the lower court found the Defendant guilty, the lower court’s punishment (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant B (1) due to the fact-finding document written by Defendant A, Defendant B transferred the content of the fact-finding document written by Defendant A to the computers next to that of Defendant A and confirmed the fact-finding document. Defendant B did not aim to slander the fact-finding document by placing it on the Internet block.
2) Even if the lower court found the Defendant guilty, the lower court’s punishment (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. According to the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s duly adopted and investigated evidence, the Defendants’ assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine as to Defendant A’s assertion 1) destroyed the reputation of the victims by making a statement to H as stated in the lower judgment, and preparing a factual confirmation document.
A) Defendant A made the victim’s statement to F as stated in the judgment of the court below.
misunderstanding that such an act by the victim violates the regulations of real estate brokerage business ethics.
In order to correct this, if the statement was delivered to H, a president of the Q branch of the Korea Authorized Broker Association, and the fact-finding certificate was also prepared, the problem raised by the defendant is between the official intermediaries belonging to Q branch in the future.