logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2020.01.07 2019고단1652
모욕
Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Criminal facts

Some of the facts charged were corrected.

At around 16:30 on May 10, 2019, the Defendant publicly insultingd the victim at a place where the employees of the above store and customers are located, such as “the victim D, which is going through the rear side of the Defendant,” “to grow up on the first day of the weather,” “the weather of the bit of bit of bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit of a bit

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (to make a statement of a reference witness, 39 pages of investigation records);

1. Relevant Article 311 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense and Article 311 of the Selection of Punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The guilty ground of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act argues that the defendant's statement to the effect that the victim does not have a public performance, on the following grounds: (a) the victim merely stated that "if he/she goes to leave a person, he/she should do so; (b) he/she should do so; and (c) he/she did not have a public performance." (d) The defendant's statement to the effect that he/she did not have a public performance.

We examine this.

Since the crime of insult is established by openly expressing an abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that may undermine the external reputation of a victim, it does not require the victim’s external reputation to be practically infringed or specific and practically infringed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Do15264, Apr. 13, 2017). The term “patent” here refers to a state in which an unspecified or multiple persons can recognize it, and it does not necessarily require a third party to recognize it at the time of display.

arrow