[1] The statement and degree of the fact in the establishment of defamation

[2] The standard for determining whether an expressive act of the media constitutes a statement of facts of defamation

[3] The case holding that it is difficult to view the contents of the article inserted in a magazine as indicating specific facts sufficient to undermine the victim's social value or evaluation

[1] Article 307 of the Criminal Code / [2] Article 307 of the Criminal Code / [3] Article 307 of the Criminal Code

[1] [2] Supreme Court Decision 98Do2188 delivered on February 25, 2000 (Gong2000Sang, 885) Supreme Court Decision 2003Do1868 Delivered on June 24, 2003 (Gong2003Ha, 1655) / [1] Supreme Court Decision 94Do1770 Delivered on October 25, 1994 (Gong194Ha, 3166) / [2] Supreme Court Decision 98Da31356 Delivered on February 9, 199 (Gong199Sang, 458)

Defendant

Defendant and Prosecutor

Attorney Park Jong-hwan

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2004No1264 Delivered on June 24, 2004

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul Central District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the Defendant’s ground of appeal

A. In order to establish the crime of defamation, a statement of fact must be made, and the alleged facts should thereby be made to the extent that the social value or evaluation of a specific person is likely to be infringed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 93Do696, Jun. 28, 1994; 2003Do1868, Jun. 24, 2003). However, even if a false statement of fact was made, if the false fact may not infringe on the social value or evaluation of a specific person, the crime of defamation under Article 307 of the Criminal Act is not established.

On the other hand, whether certain expressive acts of the press such as newspapers or monthly newspapers damage a specific person’s reputation should be determined on the basis of the objective contents of the relevant article, as well as the ordinary meaning of words used in the article on the premise that the general readers contact an article with an article with an ordinary attention, the overall flow of the article, and the connection method of phrases, etc. In addition, the social flow, etc., which form a wider context or background, should also be considered (see Supreme Court Decisions 98Da31356, Feb. 9, 199; 98Do2188, Feb. 25, 2000, etc.).

B. In light of such legal principles and records, first of all, the part regarding the part that the Defendant prepared a article of the title (hereinafter “the article of this case”) and inserted the article of the title (hereinafter “the article of this case”) in April 2003 at the center of April of the month, thereby creating a document related to personnel affairs, “the list of persons to be considered by the father and wife,” at the time of the internal organization of the secretary secretary for the secretary for the secretary for the secretary for the secretary for the secretary-general, and reported the document to the person who won the election of the National Assembly, thereby impairing the honor of the person.”

According to the contents of the article of this case, even if the President claimed to perform the affairs of the Minister through the open procedure such as the National Recommendation, etc., it does not mean that the President will not perform the verification work on the person subject to the personnel affairs, but it means that the above verification work is a natural duty of the President assisting the President’s performance of state affairs, and that there are many concerns about the person subject to consideration from the President’s official recommendation to the President’s official recommendation, and that there are more concerns about the person subject to consideration from the list than the person officially recommended by the transferee, and that the person subject to consideration from the list was more likely to exercise more influence on the person subject to the personnel affairs, such as the general officer, and that the person subject to consideration was prepared in advance, and that the person subject to consideration was not prepared in advance, and that the person subject to consideration was prepared in advance, and that the person subject to the presidential secretary’s official recommendation was prepared.

In addition, even if the content of the above report is false because the victim's gate prepared the above document or reported it to the elected person, the crime of defamation is not established unless the false fact affects the social value or evaluation of the victim's gate.

C. Next, we examine the part that "the defendant prepared the article of this case and posted the article of this case in April 2003 at the central place of the month, thereby causing the victim's gate to see as if there were problems such as security awareness as a public official, such as neglect of management of important documents, etc., and thereby impairing the honor of the same person."

In order for the media articles, such as newspapers and monthly newspapers, to include a statement of specific facts sufficient to undermine the social value or evaluation of a specific person, such specific facts do not necessarily require that they be directly specified in the contents of the article, but at least, it is necessary to express to the extent that such facts can be promptly inferred by a specific phrase in the contents of the article.

However, according to the contents of the article of this case, the part that “the Central” obtained solely a “the list of persons to be considered by their wife and wife” appears to be merely an expression that one’s news is a special category of news, and thereby suggesting the fact that the victim has neglected management of the important document. (B) It is difficult to view that the media, such as newspapers and monthly newspapers, obtained and reported the so-called “the so-called “the so-called “the so-called extreme rain report,” thereby deeming the specific person who is the preparing person of the said report to have committed a crime that impairs the reputation of the said person, even in light of the constitutional value of the freedom of press, is unreasonable.

D. Ultimately, although it is difficult to see that the contents of the article of this case prepared by the defendant and posted on April 2003 at the central place of April, 2003 indicate specific facts sufficient to undermine the social value or evaluation of the victim's literature, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles of defamation by recognizing that the defendant committed defamation under Article 307 (1) of the Criminal Act, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment. Thus, the defendant's ground of appeal pointing this out

2. As to the Prosecutor’s Grounds of Appeal

As long as the Defendant’s act does not constitute defamation, it is evident that the Defendant’s act does not constitute defamation by publicly alleging the facts under Article 307(1) of the Criminal Act, but constitutes defamation by publicly alleging the false facts under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, it is evident that there is no reason for further determination.

3. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Panel Division of the Seoul Central District Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Nung-hwan (Presiding Justice)