정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal lies in the fact that the Defendant posted the same writing as the written facts in the facts charged, but this did not intend to defame or impair the victim by plagiarism as being posted in the sense of public understanding of plagiarism issues. The confession made by the Defendant in the investigative agency and the court of the court below did not have any voluntariness as it was based on the suppression of pressure at the investigative agency and the investigative agency, and there was no confession of the fact that the Defendant made a statement of false facts, the court below found the Defendant guilty
2. Determination
A. A person who actively asserts that there exists a fact of suspicion against a person who asserts that there was no suspicion of suspicion is a burden of presenting such fact, and the prosecutor can prove that there is a false fact by means of impeachment of credibility of the materials presented. In this case, it is not sufficient to simply present a written lawsuit, and at least to the extent that it is possible for the prosecutor to prove that the materials are false. When there is no presentation of such materials or when the credibility of the presented materials is concealed, it should be held liable for publication of false facts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 9Do5190, Feb. 26, 2004; 2005Do2627, Jul. 22, 2005).
The fact that the defendant stated "," and (3) before the appointment of a national defense counsel against the defendant, the defendant himself.