[1] The meaning and meaning of "seminating false facts" and "defensive means" in the crime of undermining credit under Article 313 of the Criminal Code and the meaning of such crime

[2] The case holding that by sending a letter containing false information about a victim to a bank, the defendant has damaged the victim's credit by fraudulent means by causing misconception or misconception of the bank, etc.

[1] Article 313 of the Criminal Act / [2] Article 313 of the Criminal Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 82Do2486 delivered on February 8, 1983 (Gong1983, 538) Supreme Court Decision 2004Do1313 Delivered on May 25, 2006

Defendant

Defendant

Chuncheon District Court Decision 2005No986 Decided May 12, 2006

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The crime of damaging credit under Article 313 of the Criminal Act is established when there is a possibility of undermining the credibility of people by spreading false facts or by other fraudulent means. Here, the term "seminating false facts" refers to spreading the past or current facts that do not conform with the truth objectively to the truth, and the term "defensive means" means causing mistake, mistake, or land to the other party in order to achieve the purpose of the act of the actor, and using them. In addition, the criminal intent in the crime of damaging credit does not necessarily require conclusive intention, but it is sufficient with domination of the fact that the spread of false facts or other deceptive means is used, and as a result, there is a concern that undermining the credibility of other persons.

According to the records, the defendant sent a letter stating that "the victim non-indicted 1, who did not pay the interest of the loan and paid the interest of KRW 30 million to the head of the above bank." However, in fact, the non-indicted 2, who was the head of the above bank's acceptance branch, can be recognized as not having paid the interest of KRW 30 million. The defendant is believed to have been aware of the fact that the above contents are false. According to the above facts, it is difficult to say that the defendant's sending the above letter to the head office of the Heungungung Bank is a case where the defendant's sending it to an unspecified or many unspecified persons, thereby damaging the victim's credit by fraudulent means. In addition, even if the basic fact among the contents of the above letter is true, as long as the degree of damage to the credit increases by adding a significant portion of the above contents, it does not affect the establishment of the crime of damage to the credit.

Therefore, the court below did not regard the facts charged in this case as a crime of damaging credit by deceptive means, and deemed it as a crime of damaging credit by spreading false facts. However, as long as the court below found the crime of damaging credit guilty, the above error did not affect the conclusion of the judgment, and the judgment below did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to mistake of facts or a crime of damaging credit due to violation of the rules of evidence, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Hwang-sik (Presiding Justice)