logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.12.16 2016노911
모욕
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is as follows: (a) it is unclear whether or not the victim's complaint period has expired with respect to speaking at the end of March 2014 as stated in the primary facts charged by the defendant; and (b) each statement stated in the primary facts charged constitutes a statement of facts in the crime of defamation; and (c) the court below erred in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows.

On March 2014, the Defendant publicly insultingd the victim by stating that “In the 601 laboratory hall of D University, which is located in Seongbuk-si, Sungnam-si, the Defendant would have good questions at G professors and the National Emergency Management Agency, and would it be difficult for the Defendant to perform such a task in the future. It means that people related to R&D in the National Emergency Management Agency would cause inconvenience to the subjects of G professor’s research.” On April 2014, the Defendant at D University H H laboratory of D University, which was located in E and F, “G professors and the National Emergency Management Agency would have been stamped, and will be able to follow the task thereafter.”

B. Preliminary facts charged (damage) by the Defendant, around March 2014, at the D University Chang Hall 601 at Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, the Defendant damaged the victim’s reputation by publicly pointing out false facts to the victim E and F, “I have good written questions at G professors and the National Emergency Management Agency, and if I would like to do so, I would it difficult to future tasks.” The R&D-related people in the National Emergency Management Agency will cause inconvenience to the subjects of G professor’s research.” In D University H in April 2014, the Defendant damaged the victim’s reputation by publicly pointing out false facts.

3. Determination

A. (1) The lower court, as to the primary facts charged (definites), became aware of the offender in relation to a crime subject to victim’s complaint pursuant to Article 230(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow