beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant does not have the same statement as the facts constituting the crime of this case.
In addition, a statement made by a defendant is true and solely for the public interest and can not be punished.
2. The defendant asserts that there was no fact that the defendant made the victim D the phrase "whether or not he will not receive money from the installation of bulletin board in the elevator, whether or not he will be a woman management office and deep relation" as stated in the facts of the crime in the judgment below.
However, in full view of evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, in particular, the defendant's legal statement and E's statement in the police, it can be sufficiently recognized that the victim made the statement of the same contents as the facts of the crime at the time and place in the judgment of the court below, so the judgment below which found the guilty of the facts of the crime cannot
In addition, the defendant asserts that the statement made by the defendant is true and solely for the public interest, and thus it is not punishable.
However, in order to prevent a person from being subject to punishment by publicly alleging facts pursuant to Article 310 of the Criminal Act, an act of impairing a person’s reputation by publicly alleging facts is related to the public interest when objectively seen that the alleged facts are related to the public interest, and an actor should also indicate the facts for the public interest. In addition, the alleged facts are true or at least the actor believed to be true, and there are reasonable grounds to believe such facts (see Supreme Court Decision 94Do237, Aug. 26, 1994). In such a case, the actor must prove that the alleged facts constitute solely for the public interest.
(Supreme Court Decision 95Do1473 delivered on October 25, 1996). However, a thorough examination of the records, etc. of this case shall be conducted with the truth of the Defendant’s oral statement.