beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. D, the gist of the facts charged, was the person who was in charge of the division of E high school from September 2014 to February 2, 2016, and the Defendant is the parents of the father of the Y-gu.
Defendant was under the supervision of the complainant on May 24, 2015.
E High School E The mother of the F student of the Young-gu G called “D's sexual indecent act against a student who has recently been showed by D', and students in training were on the playground, who drinked Chinese food and drinking at the next container.
“The reputation of the complainant was damaged by openly pointing out a fact.”
The prosecutor changed the indictment at the sixth public trial date as above.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The gist of the assertion is that the Defendant did not speak as indicated in the facts charged, and even if so, the Defendant made such remarks.
Even if there is no performance, this fact is not false, but illegal as it is solely related to the public interest due to true facts.
In addition, the Defendant alleged to the effect that some of the facts charged in the instant case was merely an expression of opinion, not a factual market price, but changed to delete the facts charged in the instant case at the sixth trial date.
B. According to the records, the following circumstances are recognized.
1) On May 2015, the Defendant appears to have made it appropriate to the effect that “D supervision committed a sexual intercourse with a student, and drinking Chinese food and drinking in a container adjacent to the playground” on the supervision of the complainant by leaving the phone, who is the parents of the members of the Tong-gu Dong-gu, 2015 (G present at this Court and consistently stated this part, and even if the motive and circumstance were to be false, it is difficult to see that G’s statement is false). Meanwhile, in the instant case, the Defendant was indicted for the crime of defamation caused by the initial statement of false facts, and the Defendant argued several issues as above, but the Defendant argued for the aforementioned issues.