beta
(영문) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2016.09.29 2016노303

모욕

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles and improper sentencing)

A. The Defendant did not make the instant statement with the intent to destroy the victim, but rather made the instant statement with the intent to know the fact that the Defendant is a victim and a private right holder prior to C in the process of pressure from C and E.

In light of the motive and situation in which the Defendant made the instant speech, it cannot be deemed that the instant speech constitutes an insulting expression, such as destroying the victim’s character, and there was no intention to insult the Defendant.

(b) guilty, even

Even if the court below's punishment (one million won) is too unreasonable, it is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The defendant and his defense counsel also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal by misunderstanding the above facts and misunderstanding the legal principles, and the court below rejected such assertion on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. Examining the judgment of the court below in comparison with relevant legal principles and records, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is just, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles

The defendant's factual misunderstanding and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.

B. There are favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s failure to have any other criminal record, in addition to the one-time fine due to an injury to the Defendant in determining the unfair argument of sentencing.

However, even if the defendant's statement in this case does not constitute an insulting expression, or there was no intention of insult.

Appellanting that the Defendant did not reflect his mistake, the victim appears to have suffered considerable mental pain due to the instant crime, the Defendant did not reach an agreement with the victim, and the content of the instant remarks and the degree of insulting expressions, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, and crime.