logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2016.09.01 2016노196
명예훼손
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In full view of the following facts: (a) the video which the Defendant provided to a broadcasting station by the summary of the grounds for appeal includes a large amount of video images exceeding the previous issue as well as other video images; (b) the Defendant had interviewed to the effect that there was additional child abuse; and (c) the Defendant had been proved to have not been a child abuse in the child care center of this case through civil petitions and complaints filed by the Defendant at the time of providing the video to the broadcasting station; and (d) the Defendant had been aware that there was no child abuse in the child care center of this case by stating the falsity that there was continuous additional child abuse in the child care center of this case; and (c) at the time, the Defendant had sufficiently

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant not guilty on the ground that there is no proof of crime.

2. Determination

A. From March 201, the summary of the facts charged, the Defendant filed a complaint, complaint, and application for adjudication with respect to child abuse of the above childcare center several times from around March 201 to the effect that “the children of the Defendant attending the childcare center operated by the victim C were abused from the above childcare center teachers,” and the competent investigation agency concluded that “the child abuse did not occur at the childcare center operated by the victim,” and around September 201, the Busan High Court dismissed the Defendant’s application for adjudication for the same reason, and thus, the Defendant was well aware of the aforementioned contents.

Nevertheless, at the defendant's house located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, around December 2013, the defendant secured the CCTV video recording in the amount of one month which the victim voluntarily submitted to the court in charge of the case where the defendant was tried as above through the defendant's attorney, and there are 30 out of the above CCTV video recording.

arrow