(영문) 광주지방법원 2014.10.02 2014노438 | 리걸엔진

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) 광주지방법원 2014.10.02 2014노438

정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the misunderstanding of facts (not guilty part) at the time of the meeting of the Autonomous Committee on Countermeasures against School Violence and the statement of AA made by the defendant at the time of the meeting of the Autonomous Committee on Countermeasures against School Violence, even if the defendant did not explicitly agree with the victim, it is recognized that the defendant had published false facts on the bulletin board of the Gwangju Metropolitan Office of Education website that "the victim and the teacher concealed, reduced, or fabricated the dispute or the minutes of the committee, etc." as stated in the facts charged, the court below erred by misapprehending the fact that there was insufficient proof as to whether the defendant damaged the reputation by pointing out false facts, even though he was aware of the circumstances that the defendant agreed with the victim or agreed to do so, or that such agreement was made, and thereby, it is unfair to see that the sentence of unfair sentencing (one million won of a fine) of the court below is too unfavorable.

B. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts (the part concerning the charge of school violence) is that the Defendant expressed his opinion in order to resisting that the Defendant’s grandchildren were tried by the Juvenile Board because they were the victims of school violence, and that the educational authority did not take appropriate measures against it. Although some excessive expressions are required in the process of emphasizing the validity of his opinion, there is no illegality as it does not violate social rules. (ii) The sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing (one million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. The prosecutor's judgment ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor's judgment ex officio, and even if the defendant was found to have damaged the reputation of the victim, at least the defendant insultingd the victim.

As stated in paragraph (1), a motion to amend a bill of amendment was made for the preliminary addition of facts charged, and this Court permits it.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2016.07.20 2016노1470

-서울북부지방법원 2012.02.16 2011고정2656

-창원지방법원 2014.10.22 2014노1626

-창원지방법원 2017.07.05 2017노419

-광주지방법원 목포지원 2019.11.22 2019고정88