(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2015.07.22 2015고단546

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2015.07.22 2015고단546

명예훼손

Text

The accused shall disclose the summary of the judgment of innocence.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is in a relationship with the victim D (Inn, 53 years of age).

Around 12:00 on September 19, 2013, the Defendant called the Defendant’s phone to E, who is the seat of the Defendant, at an irregular place, and called “the victim is a bad and bad year with the victim’s access to payment, making the victim fraudulent and cut off the money.”

On January 9, 2014, the Defendant stated that “A victim’s residence is an illegal building and reported to the North Myeon Office, and caused the building to be destroyed.” The victim said that “A victim is an bad year with 280,000 won per day of payment and 5,60,000 won, for 28 days per day and 5,000 won, for 2.6 million won.”

However, there was no fact that the victim acquired the money of the defendant, there was no report about the residence of the defendant, and there was no fact that he did any work against the defendant.

Accordingly, the Defendant damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts as above.

2. The words of the defendant stated in the summary of the defendant's and his defense counsel's assertion have no specific statement of facts, and there is no possibility of spreading to others.

3. The public performance, which is the constituent element of the crime of defamation, refers to the state in which many, unspecified or unspecified persons can be recognized. Although a fact is publicly known to one person, if there is possibility of spreading to many, unspecified or unspecified persons, it shall meet the requirements of public performance. However, in a case where the public performance of defamation is acknowledged for the reason of propagation, dolusent intent is required as a subjective element of the constituent element of the crime, and as such, there is a need to dolusent intent as well as an intent to review the risk. Whether the actor permitted the possibility of dissemination or not is based on specific circumstances, such as the form of the act, the situation of the act

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2013.01.31 2012노3486

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.12.01 2016노3854

-부산지방법원 2012.10.30 2012고정3288

-부산지방법원 2015.11.12 2015노2278

-광주지방법원 2013.11.20 2013노1477