logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2013.05.03 2013노294
명예훼손
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal sent mail to the defendant for the purpose that he would inform the management body of the situation and problems of the management body;

However, such purpose does not constitute an essential public interest to the extent that an individual’s reputation is allowed.

In addition, in order to achieve the purpose of the defendant's assertion, it is sufficient only to inform the members of the management body such as F of the fact of neglect of their duties, and it cannot be said that it is an indispensable act to indicate the contents of

Therefore, although the defendant's act cannot be seen as a case where the ground for excluding illegality under Article 310 of the Criminal Act applies, the court below found the defendant not guilty. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, as the representative director of the management body D (hereinafter “management body”), the agent of the management body D” (hereinafter “management body”), which is an aggregate building in Bupyeong-gu, Nowon-gu, Seoul. The Defendant sent out a document seeking the consent from the sectional owners of D to obtain delegation of the authority to file a lawsuit for the above building rents from the sectional owners of D, and had 1,300 sectional owners know about the fact of sexual harassment against the victim F, who is the chairperson of the management body. On March 2012, the Defendant prepared the content of the victim’s work performance at the office of the above management body, and prepared the contents of the victim’s work performance at the office of the above company around March 2012, by using the computer, stating that “F is sexually offensive to female representatives, and was investigated by the Human Rights Commission on suspicion of engaging in several sexual harassments.” The Defendant had damaged the victim’s reputation by openly sending the above sectional owners of 1,300 buildings by mail.

B. The Criminal Act provides that an act that defames a person by openly pointing out a fact by the lower court is true and solely for the public interest.

arrow