beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles by inserting the same article as the facts charged in this case to C, which is an information and communications network, for the sake of the public interest of local voters' right to know and fair realization of the Gu administration, and even
B. Even if the judgment of the court below was found guilty of unfair sentencing, the punishment imposed by the court below on the defendant (three million won of fine) is excessively unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. “Purpose of slandering a person” as provided by Article 70(1) and (2) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., concerning the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is required to express the intent or purpose of defamation. As such, the issue of whether to slander a person is intended shall be determined by comparing and determining the degree of infringement of reputation that may be damaged or damaged by the expression, taking into account all the circumstances such as the content and nature of the relevant publicly alleged fact, the scope of the other party to whom the fact was published, and the method of expression, etc., and the degree of infringement of reputation that may be damaged or damaged by the expression. Since the public interest conflict with the direction of an actor’s subjective intent, it is reasonable to deem that the purpose of
In this case, the public interest includes not only the public interest of the State, society, and other general public, but also the interest and interest of a specific social group or the whole members thereof. If the main motive or purpose of an actor is for the public interest, it is difficult to view that there is an incidental purpose or motive to slander the public interest even if there is an incidental purpose or motive.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do13798 Decided January 13, 201). The lower court and the lower court.