logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.21 2016노5353
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)등
Text

The judgment below

The part of conviction and the part not guilty shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant, as indicated in the lower judgment, did not instruct F to send a text message as indicated in [Attachment Nos. 2 through 4 (hereinafter “instant text message”) to the Defendant, as stated in the lower judgment.

Even if the Defendant instructed F to do so, the Defendant instructed F.

① In the case of the instant text message No. 2, it is related to the interest and interest of the entire D commercial buildings, and thus is related to the public interest, and thus, there is a purpose of slandering the Defendant.

It is difficult to see ② In the case of the instant 3 text message, there is no proof that the content is false, even if it is false, there was no active perception of the Defendant’s falsity. ③ In the case of the instant 4 text message, the content is an exceptional and indecent expression that makes it impossible for the victim E not to disturb, and it does not constitute an insulting expression that may objectively undermine the social evaluation of the victim E’s personal value, and even if it constitutes an insulting expression, it is difficult to see that it is an inappropriate expression used in the process of criticism and emphasizing the unfairness of the act of the victim, as it is merely an inappropriate expression that is used in the process of criticism and emphasizing this.

2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (an amount of KRW 800,00) is too unreasonable.

(b) it is possible to comprehensively delegate matters relating to the organization and resolution, etc. related to the fabrication of private documents and the holding of the above-mentioned document.

Even if the power of attorney explicitly states such a purport, M and G’s power of attorney is not so indicated, M and G comprehensively delegated to the defendant the matters relating to the convening-up of the power of attorney.

It is difficult to see it.

In addition, each power of attorney was drawn up on December 201, 201, and the power of attorney stated to the effect that "if taken place, delegation shall be made even if taken place in the power of attorney."

arrow