beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.08.08 2016노4780

명예훼손

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of misunderstanding the facts, the Defendant did not have any awareness of falsity, and did not say that it was a fraud, because he had not yet been aware of the public official in charge of F’s fact-finding.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the following circumstances admitted by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant may be recognized to have injured the victim’s reputation by speaking false facts as stated in the lower court’s holding. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

① D, which appears to be a relatively neutral position in the relationship with the Defendant and the victim, is consistent from the investigative agency to the lower court’s court to the lower court, to the point at the time, that the Defendant was aware of the reservoirF works, and there is no F Corporation.

However, this Chapter has been doing the F Corporation.

The former completed a false statement.

“.....”

statement is made.

In addition, in the opinion submitted by the defendant to the court below, the "this Chapter has come to the F Corporation of the reservoir" to D at the time.

The construction work has not been performed when it was discovered in the Cheongyang-gun's office.

However, this Chapter makes a false statement.

There is a fact that the phrase " was made."

was stated.

Comprehensively taking account of this, the facts that the defendant made the above remarks at the time are recognized.

② At the time of the above remarks, the Defendant did not have any awareness of falsity because he had not known to the public official in charge at the time of such remarks.

The argument is asserted.

However, even in accordance with such assertion by the Defendant, the Defendant told D to the effect that, without examining whether there was a fact to the public official in charge at the time, the Defendant “at the time, there is no time from the Corporation, and that this Chapter made a false statement.”