beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.06.19 2018노2345

모욕

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors and misapprehension of the legal principles) that the Defendant sent pictures and phrases as described in the instant facts charged to G via mobile phone text messages to G, a company member of G, is highly likely to spread when considering the relationship between the Defendant, the victim, and G. In fact, G shows the above pictures and text messages to the other company members.

In addition, since the risk of undermining the social evaluation of the victim arises abstractly due to the false facts (the death of the victim) stated by the defendant, the defendant should be deemed to have damaged the victim's reputation by pointing out false facts as stated in the facts charged.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous in misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

2. In the trial, the ex officio determination prosecutor sent the above photographic file and the phrase “H-free sender,” “A, I, and I, I,” and “I, end-of-the-counter,” to the cell phone message of G, a member of the above company, as if the victim was dead even though the facts were not dead, thereby impairing the victim’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts.” Part of the above facts was sent to G’s cell phone message, a member of the above company, “I, I, I, and I, I,” and “I, I, I, and I, I,” and “I, I,” in the instant facts charged. Accordingly, the Defendant openly insulting the victim.” As such, the applicable provisions of the Criminal Act were amended to “Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act,” and Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act to “Article 311 of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act,” and thus, the judgment below was not subject to permission.

However, even if the judgment of the court below has the above reasons for reversal, the defendant is prosecuted against the victim.