logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2016.03.31 2015고정644
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. On December 15, 2008, the Defendant posted a notice on the Defendant’s home located in E, 118 Dong 503 at the time of the Gyeonggi-do competition on December 15, 2008, stating that the Defendant was not only a professor due to the Defendant’s conviction by the Victim F. However, the Defendant posted a notice on the Internet site established by the Defendant that the Victim F was convicted on 2002 and retired from teaching service due to the said judgment, and that the Defendant retired from teaching service on 6 occasions, such as the list of crimes in the attached Form, posted a false notice on the above car page, thereby impairing the victim’s reputation.

As a result, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts with the intention of slandering others.

2. As to each Internet bulletin posted by the defendant listed in the list of crimes attached to the judgment, the prosecutor pointed out that it is false through the disturbance of the same sight table.

Attached Form

Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don Don 144

In light of the fact that the aforementioned expression itself is written in a written form, the overall content of the posting is the form of asking questions and asking questions to the victim about the doubt held by the defendant, and that only the victimized person is subject to criminal punishment and teaching staff is true, it is difficult to view it as a statement of false facts.

In addition, even if the above expression is viewed as a statement of fact, there was a perception that the defendant was false.

there is no evidence to consider.

Attached Form

No 2 of the crime sight table No. 2 "if it is received from such a group, it is received from the shot."

The phrase, “I ambied,” and “I ambied, and are under the latter’s life.”

The phrase “a dial-a-mail is very good,” and the phrase “a dial-related station” of Nos. 4 and 5 and 6 annually cannot be deemed to be a statement of specific facts, and the content of value judgments and evaluations.

arrow