정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 200,000 won.
Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.
Punishment of the crime
On November 24, 2017, the Defendant: (a) paid a scrap screen francing on the Defendant’s vehicle; (b) knew and left the site; and (c) was contacted by the Defendant and consulted through the insurance company’s employees, but the compensation was delayed; (c) on December 21, 2017, the Defendant, using the “E” on the civil petition bulletin board of NAVER C, 20 seconds more than 20 seconds and posted the screen pictures and posts “F” as the title “F” using the “E” on December 21, 2017.
The sixth day of this month, I have the honor to avoid.
The disposal of vehicle repair costs will be made;
After avoiding contact, there was fraud that will be insurance processing, and even the police of Egye, and the telephone has also been cut off, and the text is Chewing and avoided.
It is difficult to see the Do government's request for the Do government's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do'.
The perpetrator is presumed to be an instructor in H apartment.
It is rare to request the proposal.
Recognizing the whereabouts of the perpetrator, it is unfolded with a thickness or with a request for writing or writing writing that indicates the whereabouts of the perpetrator.
“The notice was posted.”
In order to defame the victim as above, the Defendant posted public information via an information and communications network, thereby impairing the honor of the victim.
Summary of Evidence
1. Partial statement of the defendant;
1. Statement made by the police against C;
1. A photograph of a closure;
1. The contents of the car page bulletin (the defendant and his defense counsel merely posted the article with the intent to discuss damage compensation through the same apartment residents with the victim's knowledge as the victim knew of the damage as the victim refused to communicate with the defendant by avoiding damage compensation even though the victim destroyed the defendant's vehicle, and there was no purpose of slandering the victim.
The argument is asserted.
However, in light of the content, method and object of expression posted by the defendant, it is rather than that the defendant puts the above article for the purpose of simply discussing compensation for damage through the victim's will.