logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.06.29 2016고정1562
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged of this case is as shown in the annexed sheet.

2. “Purpose of slandering a person” as prescribed by Article 70(1) and (2) of the Act on Promotion of the Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc. requires the intention or purpose of a hazard. The existence of the purpose of slandering a person ought to be determined by considering all the circumstances regarding the expression itself, including the content and nature of the relevant statement, the scope of the other party to whom the relevant fact was published, the method of expression, etc., and the degree of infringement of reputation that may be damaged or damaged by the said expression.

In addition, since the purpose of slandering is in conflict with that for the public interest in the direction of the actor's subjective intention, it is denied the purpose of slandering if the alleged facts are about the public interest, unless there are special circumstances.

Matters concerning public interest include not only those concerning the public interest of the State, society, and other general public, but also those concerning the interest and interest of a specific social group or the whole members thereof.

B. Determination as to whether a publicly alleged fact pertains to such public interest shall be made by taking into account all the circumstances, such as whether the expression concerns public interest issues with the public interest that the citizen ought to know objectively, and whether it contributes to the formation of public opinion or debate on public disclosure or pure private domains, whether the victim or not belongs to the purely private domains, whether the victim raised the risk of defamation, the nature and degree of infringement, and the method and motive of the expression. If the principal motive or purpose of the actor is for the public interest, there is a purpose of slandering other private interest purposes or motives incidental to the expression, even if there is any objective of slandering the offender, even if there

It is difficult to see it.

In light of the above legal principles, the health department and the prosecutor of this case.

arrow