beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.
The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A1) There was no misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as stated in Article 1-A.1 of the facts charged, and Defendant A2-A of the facts charged.
2) Paragraph 1-B is not a false fact, and Paragraph 1-B of the facts charged is first an act of assaulting a defendant by the victim B in the self-defense level. 2) The punishment sentenced by the court below of unfair sentencing (a fine of one million won) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant B 1) Although there was a fighting on the body with the victim as described in Article 2-2(b) of the facts charged of mistake of facts, the victim’s act does not suffer injury due to the Defendant’s act. 2) The sentence (one million won of fine) sentenced by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.
2. Ex officio determination
A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendants, the Prosecutor examined ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendants, and the applicable provisions of the Act on the part concerning defamation in the facts charged in the instant case as “Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act” under “Article 307(1) of the Criminal Act,” and applied for the amendment of indictment with respect to the amendment of indictment with respect to the following changes in the facts charged. The judgment of the court below was no longer maintained
However, the defendants' assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court within the scope of the modified facts charged, and we will examine below.
B. Defendant AA’s defamation (1) around 10:00 on June 6, 201, the Defendant injured the victim’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts by openly pointing out false facts at F’s office located in Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, where the Defendant was the victim B and Silb, and G, the said office customer.
(2) The Defendant was on July 201, 201, ranked around 14:00.