logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.11.05 2015고정968
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
Text

All of the prosecutions of this case are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is found to be a member of an urban environment rearrangement project association C, and D is acting on behalf of the head of the association.

For the purpose of preventing D from having the president of the partnership:

A. On November 8, 2014, at a place where the place is unknown at least 1:50 on or around November 8, 2014, by using his/her mobile phone, and accessing the Kakao Kakao Stockholm group room having 68 members of the E urban environment rearrangement project association, “FD’s words. The fD will be made. The confusion is aggravated, the members would not be able to make a good sound, and the members would be able to make a good sound, and if all members of the association get off, flick flick flick flick flick flick flflflflflflf

B. Done at the Kakao Stockholm Group Sakao District Detains room around November 11, 2014 in the same manner as Paragraph (a) around 20:12, 2014, the phrase “D four actions shown by the D four persons will play to this mechanic under the name of G’s advice and cooperation. In addition, our members will play to four persons;

C. On November 25, 2014, at least 09:00, in the instant Kakakao Stockholm group rooms using the same method as Paragraph (a) of the same paragraph, the letter stating, “It would be a fluent to share the sales promotion cost to G and to share the sales promotion cost that would not be treated as the receipt, thereby making it possible for this end to read the Kakao Stockholm group rooms or rooms.”

However, it was true that D did not have divided the profits of the members into the property of the members or the sales promotion cost from the sales company.

As above, the Defendant undermined the honor of D by disclosing publicly false facts via an information and communications network with a view to slandering D as above.

2. The facts charged of the instant case are crimes falling under Article 70(2) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. and prosecuted against the victim’s will explicitly manifested.

arrow