2016 Highest 39 Defamation

A

Kim Jong-young (prosecutions) and Lee Peace (Trial)

Law Firm B, Attorney C

November 3, 2016

The defendant shall be innocent.

The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Summary of the facts charged in this case

The defendant is a person who served as a teacher in D High School and served as E branch, etc., and is elected by going to the election of the 18th F president that was implemented on February 5, 2015.

The Defendant, at the same time with G and high school H (manam and 51 years old), went out of the election of the president, but with the high possibility of winning the victim's election, the victim was frighted, and the victim was put in an election of F.I. at around 15:00 on the 2th day of the same month, in order for the victim to get the victim to die, the Defendant was able to gather reporters from local media at the J press at the J press center and put in an election of F. H candidates without being able to know about the person who was sentenced to punishment. The Defendant accused the K branch president at the K branch of K branch on March 2006 and accused the prosecution. The candidate, with the knowledge of the fact that 160 million won received in return for deliberation on food by external writers, was written with K membership fee and without being able to use the false personal purpose for the purpose of "an honorary newspaper with knowledge of the fact that the candidate was damaged."

피고인은 2015. 2. 3. 울산 중구 0에 있는 D고등학교 도서관에서 틈틈이 위와 같은 내용과 논설이 보도된 울산제일일보, 울산매일, 울산신문의 해당 부분과 인터넷 기사를 출력한 부산일보의 해당 부분 및 피해자가 건축심의와 관련해 뇌물을 수수한 혐의로 1심에서 징역 3년에 추징금 4천만 원이 선고되었다는 내용을 보도한 P자 경상일보의 해당 부분을 각 복사한 다음 '울산예술의 미래를 책임지시고 계시는 존경하는 선생님! 울산예술의 발전을 위해 다음 신문기사를 한번 읽어보시기 바랍니다.' 라는 안내문과 함께 큰 봉투에 각 1부씩 넣어 그날 15:20 경 울산 중구 학성동 349-17에 있는 울산우 체국에서 'Q'이라는 유령단체 명의로 대의원 45명 중 지지성향이 모호한 R, S, T 등 22명 앞으로 익일 특급우편으로 발송하여 도달하게 하였다. 이로써 피고인은 공연히 허위사실을 적시하여 피해자의 명예를 훼손하였다.

2. Determination:

A prosecutor has instituted a prosecution by applying the crime of defamation by publicly alleging false facts (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act) to the facts charged in the instant case. The facts constituting the elements of a crime charged in a criminal trial are subjective requirements, objective requirements, or the prosecutor bears the burden of proof. As such, in a case prosecuted for defamation by publicly alleging false facts under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act, the fact that a person’s social evaluation was revealed, and that the alleged facts are not consistent with the objective truth, and that the Defendant stated the alleged facts with the awareness that they were false (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do13718, Sept. 4, 2014).

The facts charged in this case do not clearly indicate which part of the defendant's alleged facts is false, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court: ① the facts charged in this case were revealed by copying the newspaper articles and sending them by mail. The main contents of the article are that on February 2, 2015, the J press center made an interview with the complainant H with negative contents, and the victim was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the charge of receiving a bribe in the past; ② the facts that the defendant made an interview at this time and at this time and place and was sentenced to the crime of acceptance of bribe are obviously false; ③ the article related to the above press statement was also stated in the statement that there was suspicion of the complainant; ④ The contents of the article presented by the prosecutor are hard to view that there were no reasonable evidence to acknowledge that the defendant's testimony in this case is false, and there was no other evidence to prove that the facts were false evidence to the witness in this case.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, the court rendered a judgment of innocence pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and rendered a judgment of innocence pursuant to Article 58(2)

Judge semi-crimes