logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.10.24 2018고단198
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
Text

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

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who served as a teacher of “D Child Care Center” that the complainant C serves as the president.

No person shall conceal any false information openly through an information and communications network with intent to defame any other person, thereby impairing the reputation of any other person.

Nevertheless, on May 29, 2017, the Defendant refers to the complainant on the bulletin board of the “D Child Care Center” group’s “E” group, which is a group’s “D Child Care Center” group’s “D Child Care Center” group that is accessible by related persons, such as parents and teachers, etc. of child care centers, and refers to ① there is no payment standard and there is a difference between the

"............" and "..................."

“..... ③ “The President of the National Assembly” is the State of the Republic of Korea, and the Note is the State of the Republic of Korea.

", (4) I have to prepare a large number of public subscriptions for one year, and many teachers have retired from office on the ground that they have many days and are difficult.

Done a false description (hereinafter referred to as “instant notice”).

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the complainant by exposing public false information through information and communication network with a view to slandering the complainant.

2. Determination

A. In order to establish a “crime of defamation by revealing false facts through an information and communications network” under Article 70(2) of the Act on Promotion of the Use of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (hereinafter “Information and Communications Network Act”), the fact that was revealed by the Defendant should be recognized as false (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do4949, Oct. 28, 2010). The term “inciting facts” refers to a report or statement on specific past or present facts, time and space.

If the important parts of the drones fact are consistent with objective facts, it is somewhat different from the truth in detail.

arrow