(영문) 창원지방법원 마산지원 2015.07.01 2014고정528

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) 창원지방법원 마산지원 2015.07.01 2014고정528

명예훼손

Text

The Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is published.

Reasons

1. Defendant A of the facts charged in the instant case is the chairman of the D Development Project in Hanam-gun, Ha, and Defendant B is the chairman of the D Development Project in Hanam-gun, Hanam-gun.

Defendant

A, around 11:30 on January 6, 2014, around 11:30, at the Haan-gun D Center, the fact that the victim E, who was the head of the previous village, made a speech that the victim E, while taking a bath to the defendant, died with knife, thereby damaging the victim’s reputation by openly stating the fact that D residents, who were the head of the village, died with knife in knife.

B. At the time and place indicated in the above paragraph (a), Defendant B damaged the victim’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts on the ground that, although the victim did not receive money in connection with the construction of the community center, Defendant B stated that “I received money in return for the construction cost at the time of the construction of the community center and divided it into F, Saemaul leader G, etc., the development chairperson at the time, and filed a complaint for this fact, and received a decision of non-guilty suspicion.”

2. Determination

A. The Defendants asserted that the time and place stated in the facts charged did not state the words such as the statement in this Court.

B. We examine the evidence that seems to correspond to the facts charged in the instant case in a series of times.

1) The gist of the statements made by the victim E in an investigative agency and in this court by the victim E in the investigative agency and the victim in this court is that “the victim was not present at the D meeting held at the date and time indicated in the facts charged. However, it is insufficient to recognize the facts charged of the instant case only by the victim’s above statement that the Defendants came to know of the same remarks as the facts charged in the instant case at the meeting, including H, I, and J, and that H was aware of the fact that the Defendants came to know at the meeting of the community, such as H, I, and J. 2. 2) The statements made by H in the investigative agency and in this court

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2015.10.20 2015노1613

-창원지방법원 2017.03.16 2016노2536

-창원지방법원 2014.02.18 2013노2051

-대전지방법원 논산지원 2018.07.03 2018고단25

-창원지방법원 마산지원 2014.07.08 2013고단961