(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.11.08 2018노3083 | 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) 대구지방법원 2018.11.08 2018노3083

명예훼손

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 6,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant did not make a statement as to the facts charged to G, H, M, etc., the lower court found the Defendant guilty of all of the facts charged of this case, it erred by misapprehending the facts.

B. Legal principles 1) Home affairs Defendant made the same remarks as the facts charged.

Even if the phrase is merely merely a simple expression of opinion, it does not constitute a statement of fact, and there is no proof as to whether it is a false fact.

2) Since the words written in the facts charged were made at a private place with two pages, performance is not recognized as having no possibility of spreading in light of the situation at the time.

3) In addition, the judgment of the court below allowed amendments to the indictment No. 1 as stated in the judgment of the court below. Since the revised indictment does not coincide with the existing indictment and the basic facts, it is erroneous to permit it, and the victim B already expressed his intention not to punish the changed indictment, this part of the indictment should be dismissed.

(c)

The punishment sentenced by the court below (7 million won) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court acknowledged the fact that the Defendant made the same remarks as the facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence indicated in the judgment, such as G, H and M’s testimony.

2) The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below: (i) G, H, and M have consistently and specifically stated that the Defendant had made the same remarks as the facts charged from the investigation stage to the court below’s court; (ii) examining the contents of telecommunication conversations between the Defendant and H (see, e.g., 252 of the trial record); and (ii) whether the Defendant’s “honing horse” falls short of the Defendant’s “hon-way horse”;

A statement is made to be unfavorable to oneself, such as referring to where a person who emits dust is her body or her hair.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원부천지원 2019.11.27 2019가합102085

-의정부지방법원 2017.06.15 2016고정1688

-대구지방법원 2017.05.24 2017고정497

-울산지방법원 2012.08.16 2012고정41

-서울남부지방법원 2018.11.29 2017고정1902