Defendant 1 and two others

Pool, Seo-gu (prosecutions), and He/she shall hold a public trial

Law Firm Macho et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Defendant 1 shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months, by imprisonment for two months, and by imprisonment for six months.

However, with respect to defendants 2 and 3, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Of the facts charged in the instant case against Defendant 1, the facts charged of violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc. (Defamation) and defamation against Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 as of May 8, 2013, and of violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc. (Defamation) and each of the facts charged against Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 as of May 7, 2013 and June 17, 2013, are acquitted.

The summary of the judgment of innocence against Defendant 3 shall be disclosed.

【Basic Facts】

1. Current status of Nonindicted Incorporated Foundation 2 University

Around 1945, Nonindicted Foundation 2’s university was established in the Seoul Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City ( Address omitted) Japan by Nonindicted 8, and was registered as a juristic person on January 18, 1964 on March 17, 200, and the name was changed to that of Nonindicted Foundation 2 (hereinafter “school juristic person”).

Under its jurisdiction, a school juristic person has a board of directors, a corporate office, a non-indicted 2 university, an educational institution, a non-indicted 2 university (including a language campus located in the Seoul Camp and the Si of Do in Eup/Myeon), an affiliated high school, an affiliated middle school, a non-indicted 2 university hospital, a non-indicted 2 university hospital, a non-indicted 2 university hospital, a profit-making business ward, a profit-making business ward, a ▽▽△△△△△○, a (name 1 omitted in English), a (name 2 omitted in English),

2. The Chief Director of the School Foundation, Nonindicted 1

(C) Nonindicted 8: (a) had five male and female under Ssleep; (b) Nonindicted 9, Nonindicted 10, and female were killed; (c) were alive by Nonindicted 11, Nonindicted 12, Nonindicted 12, and Nonindicted 13; (d) the victim Nonindicted 1 (e) was the spouse of Nonindicted 9, who was the non-standing director of the school juristic person in 1994, and (e) was appointed as the president of the school juristic person on January 20, 201, and thereafter serves as the president of the school juristic person from that time.

3. Appointment and resignation of Nonindicted 3’s former president

After taking office as the president of the school juristic person on January 2, 2001, the victim newly built the building "(in English name 2 omitted)" from around 2007 to create the income of the school juristic person, and run the business "(in English name 3 omitted)". On September 1, 2010, Nonindicted 3, who is a professor of the college of the non-indicted 2 college, was appointed as the president of the non-indicted 2 college in order to develop the biotechnology sector.

In addition, the victim appointed Non-Indicted 3 as the vice-president of the duty to supervise Non-Indicted 2 University Hospital, the president of the United States UNFCCC (Korean name 4 omitted), and the chairman of the operating committee (Korean name 3 omitted) participating in the management of the educational foundation.

Since Nonindicted 3 was appointed as the president, due to the receipt of the money in the name of a reimbursement, (English name 2 omitted), two free use of guest rooms, excessive use of business promotion expenses, etc., Nonindicted 2 University Union and Nonindicted 2 University Professors Council were dissatisfied with the complaint. Accordingly, Nonindicted 3 resigned from the president of Nonindicted 2 University on May 17, 2012.

Since around May 2012, Non-Indicted 2’s trade union and the faculty council, etc. appointed Non-Indicted 3 as president, and Non-Indicted 3’s above misconduct act was possible from time to time due to the victim’s active defense. As such, the victim’s continuous demand to retire from the president.

4. Status of the Defendants

A. Defendant 1’s appointment of the chairman of Nonindicted University 2’s labor union

피고인은 2002. 2. ◁◁대학교 경제학과를 졸업한 다음 2003. 3. 12.부터 2013. 2. 28.까지 공소외 2 대학교 서울캠퍼스의 기획과, 기획예산팀, 재무팀, 대외협력팀, 관재팀, 입학관리팀, 학생지원팀에서 근무하였다.

The Defendant, while working for Nonindicted University 2, worked as a vice head of Nonindicted University 2’s trade union (hereinafter “trade union”), was appointed as the secretary general of the trade union from March 1, 2009 to February 28, 2013, and as the chairperson of the trade union from March 1, 2013 to February 28, 2013 (which can be reappointed once) and serves as a full-time employee until now.

B. Appointment of Defendant 2’s president of Nonindicted University 2

피고인은 1982. 2.경 ▷▷대학교 중어중문학과를 졸업하고 1986. 2. ♤♤♤♤♤♤대학에서 석사학위를 취득한 다음, 1992년경 ♡♡대에서 중어중문학과 교수로 재직하다가 1993년경 ▷▷대학교에서 중어중문학 박사학위를 취득하였고, 1995. 3. 1.경 공소외 2 대학교 중어중문학과 교수로 임용되어 2014. 2. 경까지 근무하였다. 피고인은 공소외 2 대학교에 근무하는 동안 2011. 3.경 공소외 2 대학교 교수협의회 회장직에 취임하여 2013. 2.경까지 재직하였고, 재차 2013. 2.경 위 교수협의회 회장직에 취임하여 2014. 2.경까지 재직하였다.

C. Appointment of the president of the East Korean University of Non-Indicted 2, Defendant 3

피고인은 1983. 2. 공소외 2 대학교 ●●대학 ■■학과를 졸업하고 1985. 9. 1.부터 1990. 8. 27.까지 캐나다에 있는 ▲▲▲ 대학교에서 독성학에 대한 석 · 박사 학위를 취득한 다음, 1990. 9. 1.부터 공소외 2 대학교 ●●대학교 ■■학과에 교수로 부임하여 2014. 2.경까지 근무하였다. 피고인은 공소외 2 대학교에 근무하는 동안 2012. 5. 26. 동문교수협의회 회장으로 취임하여 2014. 2.경까지 재직하였다.

5. Formation of a criminal fact-finding committee for the normalization of the ▽▽▽△△ Institute;

A trade union and the above faculty council requested the victim to retire from the board of directors as stated in paragraph (3), but the victim did not comply with such request, the trade union, the above faculty council, and the non-indicted 2 university Dong 2 council established the "non-governmental countermeasure committee," which is a crime-based member to achieve the eight-party requirements, including the retirement of the board of directors, around November 12, 2012.

(C) On January 7, 2013, Non-Indicted 8’s child gathering (representative Non-Indicted 12) took place with the above Non-Indicted 8’s Non-Indicted 12 and demanded the victim’s resignation, etc. by organizing a “non-indicted 2’s organization for the normalization of the ▽△△△△○ Institute” together with the labor union, Non-Indicted 2’s university faculty council, and the non-indicted 2’s council of faculty members of the same university (hereinafter “Non-Indicted 12”).

【Criminal Facts】

"2013 Highest 7947"

1. Violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection;

(a) Submission of an application for special audit to an educational finance book;

Defendant 1 submitted to the Ministry of Education, on March 27, 2013, a written application for special audit to the effect that Defendant 2, the president of the University Professors Council, the president of the University Professors Council, Defendant 3, and Nonindicted 8’s representative of Nonindicted 12, who constituted an emergency response committee, would be able to receive special audit of the victim’s school foundation president and the cancellation of approval of the school foundation.

그런데, 그 특별감사신청서에는『... 다) 공소외 1의 복잡한 이성관계, 공소외 1은 이사장으로 취임하기 이전부터 공소외 4라는 사업가와 적절하지 못한 관계에 있었으며, 이사장으로 취임한 이후에는 위 공소외 4의 친구인 공소외 5라는 사업가와의 부적절한 관계로 인하여 동인의 처로부터 공개적인 비난을 받은 바 있습니다. 그 후에도 공소외 1은 공소외 2 대학교의 전 직원 공소외 6과 부적절한 관계에 있었는데 이는 공소외 1이 2008.경 공소외 3을 만나며 일신됩니다. 위 공소외 4, 공소외 5 및 공소외 6은 모두 각 혼인관계에 있던 자들이었으므로 이들과 부적절한 관계를 갖는 것은 형법상 간통죄에 해당되는 것입니다. 다. 공소외 3의 총장 선임과 그 후의 불법·부당 행위 1) 공소외 3의 총장 선임, 공소외 1은 2010. 9. ◎◎대 교수로 재직하던 공소외 3을, 기존의 총장후보 선출제도 마저 바꾸며, 공소외 2 대학교의 새로운 총장으로 선임합니다. 이때에도 공소외 1은 공소외 3과 부적절한 관계를 맺습니다 ............ 바. 공소외 1의 불법·부당행위 1) 이성과의 부적절한 관계........공소외 1의 각종 비위 행위는 이러한 동녀의 복잡한 남녀관계에 주로 기인합니다 2) 공소외 4와의 부적절한 관계에 기인한 공소외 2 대학교 교수의 부당임용, 공소외 1은 공소외 4와 부적절한 관계를 유지하는 대가로서 동인으로부터 무려 약 11억 8,400만원을 받았는데 그 후 동인과의 재판을 거치며 법원으로부터 위 금원 중 3억 3,400만 원을 공소외 4에게 반환하라는 판결을 받게 됩니다. 4) 공소외 6과의 부적절한 관계에 기인한 ◆◆건설에 대한 일감몰아주기 및 공소외 2 대학교 병원 지정화환업체의 선정 등 공소외 1은 2005. 동녀와의 잦은 골프회동과 술자리 등으로 소문난 공소외 6(공소외 1 이사장 취임 당시의 노조위원장)를 공소외 2 대학교 체육부장서리로 승진 발령하였는데..... 5) 공소외 3과의 부적절한 관계에 기인한 총장 임명과 비호행위, 공소외 1이 2010. 기존의 총장후보 선출제도 마저 바꾸며 자신과 부적절한 관계에 있던 공소외 3을 공소외 2 대학교의 새로운 총장으로 선임한 것, 그 후 공소외 3의 수많은 학내 비리행위에 대하여 직·간접적으로 관여하였다는 것, 공소외 3의 비리행위를 적극 비호한 것..... 』라고 기재되어 있었다.

However, the victim did not have any improper relationship with Nonindicted 4, 5, 6, and 3, or had no connection with the above Nonindicted 4 in a marital relationship. Moreover, in order to revitalize the medical branch of Nonindicted 2’s college, Nonindicted 3, who was the professor of Manton University, was appointed as the president of Nonindicted 2’s college, and Nonindicted 3 was not appointed as the president of Nonindicted 3 due to the inappropriate relationship with Nonindicted 3.

(b) Violation of Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information;

피고인은 2013. 3. 28. 15:02경 공소외 2 대학교 ★★교육원 3층 302-1호에 있는 노동 조합 사무실에서 ‘(영문명 5 생략) 노동조합〈(이메일 주소 1 생략)〉을 이용하여 학교법인의 기획과장으로 재직 중인 공소외 14의 이메일 (이메일 주소 2 생략)로 위와 같은 허위내용이 기재되어 있는 특별감사신청서를 전송한 것을 비롯하여 공소외 2 대학교 직원들 334명에게 위 특별감사신청서를 이메일 전송하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by divulging public false information through information and communication networks with a view to slandering the victim.

2. Violation of the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Guarantee of Secrecy and Electronic Financial Transactions;

(a) Illegal entry of a detailed statement of use of a corporate card;

As stated in paragraph (1), the Defendant completed the written application for special audit sent to Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 2 University teachers and staff of the educational foundation, as indicated in Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 4, Nonindicted 5, and Nonindicted 6, but was unable to secure specific evidentiary materials therefrom. As such, Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 3, by securing the details of the use of the corporate card used by the victim and Nonindicted 3, obtained a detailed statement of approval, with respect to the use of the corporate card used by the victim and Nonindicted 3.

공소외 1은 ○○카드로부터 2010. 1.경 ‘학교법인 공소외 2 대학교’ 명의로 발급받은 법인카드[카드번호 :(카드번호 1 생략)]를 사용하였고, 공소외 2 대학교 총장인 공소외 3은 2010. 9.경 ‘공소외 2 대학교’ 명의로 발급받은 법인카드[카드번호 : (카드번호 2 생략)]를 사용하였다. ○○카드로부터 법인카드 사용내역서를 발급받기 위해서는 ○○카드나 ▼▼은행을 방문하여 법인 인감증명서, 사업자등록증, 대리인 신분증 등을 첨부하여 법인 대표이사 혹은 대표자의 인감도장을 날인한 신청서를 작성, 제출하여 그 신청인이 법인카드 사용내역서를 발급받을 수 있는 정당한 권한자임을 입증하여야만 한다.

The card name holder of the corporate card used by Nonindicted 1 is the financial department of the school juristic person’s secretariat. The card name holder used by Nonindicted 3 is the card name holder of Nonindicted 1 and the management authority is the school juristic person’s secretariat. The card name holder of the corporate card used by Nonindicted 3 was Nonindicted 3 and the management authority was the general team of Nonindicted 2 University, and there was no authority to issue a letter of use of the corporate card used by Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 3.

그런데, ○○카드나 ▼▼은행을 방문하지 않고 ○○카드 콜센터 ARS 상담원을 통하면, 법인카드번호와 사업자등록번호만 알고 있으면 법인카드 사용내역서와 승인내역서를 발급받을 수 있다는 점에 착안하여 불상의 방법으로 공소외 1과 공소외 3이 사용하는 법인카드의 카드번호를 알아냈다.

B. Violation of Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Guarantee

No person working for a financial company, etc. may provide or divulge information or data about the details of the relevant financial transaction to any third person, and no person may request a person working for the financial company, etc. to provide such information or data, unless the card holder's written request or consent is obtained.

(1) A crime committed on April 23, 2013

① Use of Nonindicted Party 1’s corporate card (credit card number: No. 1 omitted)

Nevertheless, at around 13:45 on April 23, 2013, the Defendant calls at the above trade union office to the ○○ Card △△ △△ Call Center, and requested Nonindicted 15, a corporate card counselor, to send a corporate card usage statement for three years from January 2010 to March 2013, 2013, stating that “The Defendant is the full-time officer of the trade union and is not the person who used the corporate card or the management authority as seen above, and the Defendant did not have the right to receive the corporate card usage statement, etc. because he did not obtain the consent or approval of the card holder.”

Nonindicted 15 believed the Defendant to be the legitimate management authority to receive the notice of the use of the said corporate card immediately, and sent the details of use from January 1, 2010 to February 28, 2013 of the said corporate card to “(e-mail address 3 omitted)” as the Defendant’s personal e-mail (e-mail address 3 omitted), which is the Defendant’s personal e-mail designated by the Defendant, by e-mail, and the Defendant received the information of financial transaction by transmission of

② A detailed statement of use of Nonindicted 3’s corporate card (credit card number: No. 2 omitted)

On April 23, 2013, at around 15:14, the Defendant was provided with the content of use from September 1, 2010 to May 31, 2012, of the corporate card used by Nonindicted 3 by Nonindicted 16, a corporation card counselor, using the e-mail of the Defendant in the same manner as the above paragraph (1).

(2) A crime of April 29, 2013

On April 29, 2013, at around 11:50, the Defendant requested Nonindicted 17, a corporation-based telephone counselor, to provide a detailed statement of approval for the card to verify the settlement time with the said corporation card used by Nonindicted 1 during the period from January 2010 to March 2013, 2013, using the same method as the written in paragraph (1) (1).

However, inasmuch as Nonindicted 17’s information prior to October 8, 2012, which was six months prior to March 2013, 2012, was issued only by submitting a separate documentary evidence, the Defendant received financial transaction information by being transmitted to the Defendant’s e-mail only after October 8, 2012, where it is not necessary to submit a separate document.

(c) Violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act;

No electronic financial transaction information shall be perused or provided by fraudulent or other illegal means.

Nevertheless, the Defendant was provided with the detailed statement of use and the detailed statement of approval of the corporate card as if the Defendant was the legitimate user or management authority of the corporate card used by Nonindicted Party 1 and Nonindicted Party 3, at the time and place of the foregoing paragraph.

Accordingly, the Defendant perused or received financial transaction information by falsity or other illegal means.

" 2014 Highest 5870"

1. Violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection;

(a) Submission of an application for special audit to an educational finance book;

Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 submitted to the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, on March 27, 2013, an application for special audit to the effect that Defendant 1 and the representative of the non-indicted 8’s children’s meeting constituted the Emergency Countermeasure Committee, together with Nonindicted 12, the victim Nonindicted 1’s revocation of approval and the special audit of the school juristic person.

그 특별감사신청서에는『... 다) 공소외 1의 복잡한 이성관계, 공소외 1은 이사장으로 취임하기 이전부터 공소외 4라는 사업가와 적절하지 못한 관계에 있었으며, 이사장으로 취임한 이후에는 위 공소외 4의 친구인 공소외 5라는 사업가와의 부적절한 관계로 인하여 동인의 처로부터 공개적인 비난을 받은 바 있습니다. 그 후에도 공소외 1은 공소외 2 대학교의 전 직원 공소외 6과 부적절한 관계에 있었는데 이는 공소외 1이 2008.경 공소외 3을 만나며 일신됩니다. 위 공소외 4, 공소외 5 및 공소외 6은 모두 각 혼인관계에 있던 자들이었으므로 이들과 부적절한 관계를 갖는 것은 형법상 간통죄에 해당되는 것입니다. 다. 공소외 3의 총장 선임과 그 후의 불법·부당 행위 1) 공소외 3의 총장 선임, 공소외 1은 2010. 9. ◎◎대 교수로 재직하던 공소외 3을, 기존의 총장후보 선출제도 마저 바꾸며, 공소외 2 대학교의 새로운 총장으로 선임합니다. 이때에도 공소외 1은 공소외 3과 부적절한 관계를 맺습니다 ............ 바. 공소외 1의 불법·부당행위 1) 이성과의 부적절한 관계........공소외 1의 각종 비위 행위는 이러한 동녀의 복잡한 남녀관계에 주로 기인합니다 2) 공소외 4와의 부적절한 관계에 기인한 공소외 2 대학교 교수의 부당임용, 공소외 1은 공소외 4와 부적절한 관계를 유지하는 대가로서 동인으로부터 무려 약 11억 8,400만원을 받았는데 그 후 동인과의 재판을 거치며 법원으로부터 위 금원 중 3억 3,400만 원을 공소외 4에게 반환하라는 판결을 받게 됩니다. 4) 공소외 6과의 부적절한 관계에 기인한 ◆◆건설에 대한 일감몰아주기 및 공소외 2 대학교 병원 지정화환업체의 선정 등 공소외 1은 2005. 동녀와의 잦은 골프회동과 술자리 등으로 소문난 공소외 6(공소외 1 이사장 취임 당시의 노조위원장)를 공소외 2 대학교 체육부장서리로 승진 발령하였는데.....』라고 기재되어 있었다.

However, the victim did not have any improper relationship with the above non-indicted 4, non-indicted 5, non-indicted 6, and non-indicted 4 in a marital relationship, or there was no communication with the above non-indicted 4 in a marital relationship. Moreover, in order to revitalize the medical branch of the non-indicted 2 University, it was inappropriate that the non-indicted 3, who was the professor of the research branch of the kniven University, was appointed as the president of the non-indicted 3 as the president of the non-indicted 3. In addition, the non-indicted 6 was not ordered as the head of the sports division since it was inappropriate for the victim to be issued as the director of the sports division through the normal personnel procedure, such as the proposal from the president of the non-indicted 2 University after the completion of the Trade union Chairperson.

(b) Violation of the Act on Promotion of Utilization of Information and Communications Network;

On March 28, 2013, at least 14:55, the Defendants sent e-mail to approximately 900 persons, composed of the members of the Non-Indicted 2 University Faculty Council, using the official account of the University Council (“No. 4 omitted”)

Accordingly, the Defendants, in collusion with the above Defendants 1, revealed publicly false facts through information and communications networks for the purpose of slandering them, thereby impairing the honor of the victims.

"2013 Highest 7947"

1. The defendant 1's partial statement

1. Part of the witness’s legal statement and Nonindicted 7’s legal statement

1. Some of the statements made by the prosecution against the accused in the examination protocol of suspect;

1. A written confirmation, each fact-finding certificate;

1. The case, record, and application for special audit of replies to requests for data related to the leakage of information on approval of the corporate card;

" 2014 Highest 5870"

1. Each legal statement of the defendant 2 and the defendant 3

1. Part of the witness’s legal statement and Nonindicted 18’s legal statement

1. Some of the statements made by the prosecution against the Defendants in the protocol of interrogation of suspects

1. An application for special audit;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Defendant 1: Article 70(2) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (a publicly alleging false information via information and communications networks); Articles 6(1) and 4(1) of the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Guarantee of Secrecy (a point of requesting the provision of financial transaction information, etc.); Article 49(4)10 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act

Defendant 2 and Defendant 3: Article 70(2) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc. and Article 30 of the Criminal Act

1. Selection of a sentence;

Each Imprisonment Selection

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes (Defendant 1);

Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution (defendants 2 and 3);

Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Code

○ The portion of defamation due to transmission of the application for special audit (defendants): there is no objective material to acknowledge the victim’s inhumanity relationship, and the Defendants also indicated by using a decent expression without any separate confirmation procedure that is merely a written indictment, and thus constitutes a statement of false facts. Moreover, the publicly alleged facts constitute a case belonging to the private sector because the victims have established a long-term inhumanity relationship with several male persons. The Defendants do not seem to have been necessary for forming public opinion in the school for the normalization of the school foundation. In light of the fact that the Defendants do not appear to be necessary for the formation, etc. of public opinion in the school for the normalization of the school foundation, the president of the school foundation who is female victim is deemed to have damaged the serious moral and moral reputation of the said expression, and the part which contributed

○ 금융거래정보 제공요구 및 취득 부분(피고인 1): ① 실지명의에 의한 금융거래를 실시하고 그 비밀을 보장하여 금융거래의 정상화를 목적으로 하고 이를 위하여 명의인의 동의 없이는 금융거래정보 등을 타인에게 제공하거나 누설하는 등의 행위를 금지하는 금융실명거래및비밀보장에관한법률의 입법목적이나 규정취지, 여신전문금융회사도 위 법에서 규정하는 금융회사에 해당하는 점 등에 비추어 보면 이 사건 법인카드의 거래정보는 위 법이 정하는 금융거래정보에 해당하고, 공소외 2 대학교의 노조위원장인 피고인 1에게 학교법인의 법인카드 사용내역을 제공받을 권한이 있다고 보기 어렵다(예산·결산에 있어서는 자문기구인 대학◀◀원회의 부의장이라 하여도 마찬가지이다). ② 피고인 1이 법인카드의 사용내역을 제공받을 권한이 없음에도 이를 제대로 알리지 아니한 채 제도의 허점을 이용하여 거래정보를 제공받은 이상 수단이나 방법의 상당성을 갖추었다고 할 수 없고, 또한 법인카드의 사용내역을 제공받는 방법이 위 방법 이외의 다른 수단이나 방법이 없었다고도 볼 수 없으므로 정당행위에 해당하지 않는다.

○ Even if the normalization of a school is clear, the Defendants had caused serious personal and moral defamation to the victim by falsely pointing out the influorial relationship of a private woman, which is not related thereto, and Defendant 1 acquired financial transaction information that ought to be kept confidential in an unlawful manner in order to accomplish his/her own assertion. The Defendants’ act cannot be deemed as an industrial action that is not problematic for the purpose, and even if it appears that the damage would be considerable to the victim, the Defendants still did not reflect his/her wrongness while criticisming the victim, and thus, the Defendants need to bear strict liability corresponding to their criminal liability.

However, the defendants appear to have committed the crime of this case for the normalization of school rather than for their personal interests, and the defendants 1 and 2 are first offenders, and the defendants 3 have no record of punishment except for a fine once, and the sentencing conditions indicated in the records such as the age, character, conduct and environment of the defendants shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records.

1. Summary of the facts charged

○ Basic facts

The Defendants analyzed the details of the use of the victim Nonindicted 1 and the corporate card used by Nonindicted 3, which was obtained through the same method as the statement in Defendant 1’s crime No. 2-A as indicated in the judgment of Defendant 1, and, in order to maintain inhuman relationships between the victim and Nonindicted 3, the Defendants thought Defendant 1 to have the educational department enter a golf course or to have the educational department cancel the approval of the board of directors or use it for the purpose of pressure of the victim to retire from the board of directors.

피고인들은 위 공소외 12와 함께 2013. 5. 2.경 교육재정부에 『1. 이사장 공소외 1과 전 총장 공소외 3의 (추가적) 업무상배임 가. 공소외 1과 공소외 3의 부적절한 관계, 학교법인의 이사장인 공소외 1이 공소외 2 대학교의 전 총장인 공소외 3과 부적절한 관계에 있었음은 2013. 3. 27.자 특별감사신청서(제10/23쪽)에서 이미 살펴본 바와 같거니와 동인들은 이러한 관계를 유지하는 과정에서 학교법인의 신용카드를 사용하여 ① 함께 여행을 간다든가 ② 여행지의 백화점 및 면세점에서 고가의 상품을 매수한다든가 ③ 골프용품을 구입한다는 등의 행위를 한 후 학교법인으로 하여금 위 대금을 지급하도록 하며 사용액 상당의 업무상배임을 ‘추가적으로’ 범하였습니다. 나. 관련증거 1) 2) 신청인이 확보한 증거에 따르면, 공소외 1과 공소외 3은 ① 제주도, 일본 후쿠오카, 싱가포르, 미국 LA 등을 함께 여행하였음을 알수 있고(골프를 함께 한 것까지 포함하면 수십차례에 달합니다) ② 2010. 12. 25. 일본 후쿠오카의 ‘Daimaru Fukuoka-Tenjin'이라는 고급백화점에서는 무려 2,886,029원의 물품을 매수하였음을 알 수 있으며(공소외 3의 공소외 1에 대한 성탄 선물로 추정) ③ 2011. 12. 17. ▶▶▶▶▶▶ 골프장에서 공소외 1은 무려 6,027,600원을 지출하고, 같은 날 공소외 3은 인근의 골프용품점에서 694,000원의 골프용품을 구입하였음을 알수 있습니다 3) 법인카드의 사용내역에 의하면, 공소외 1과 공소외 3은 자신들의 불륜관계를 유지하는 데 상당한 금액을 학교법인의 교비로써 지출하도록 하였는바, 이는 업무상 배임에 해당할 뿐만 아니라 타인의 모범이 되어야 할 교육자로서 그와 전혀 다른 반대의 행태를 보였다는 점에서 커다란 비난을 받아야 마땅한 것입니다.....』라고 기재되어 있는 특별감사신청서(제2차)를 제출하였다.

However, the victim's corporate card disbursement was necessary for the promotion of projects to operate the school juristic person, external activities, cooperation with related agencies, etc., and the use of the golf course on the weekends and holidays was inevitable for ordinary business activities related to the management of the person in charge of the management of the golf course.

한편, 피해자의 해외 출장은 대학운영 활성화, 해외 유력 동문과의 인적 네트워크 강화 및 대외경쟁력의 제고를 위한 목적으로 즉 ① 학교법인이 운영하는 LA캠퍼스인 ♠♠♠ 학위수여식등 학사 행사 참가 ② 공소외 2 대학교 2+2 복수학위제를 공동 운영하는 대외 협력 대학 방문 ③ ♥♥♥♥ 운영과 관련된 해외 상업시설 방문 ④ 골프장 경영과 관련된 해위 유명 골프장 답사 등으로 대별되는 것이었다.

게다가 2011. 12. 17. ▶▶▶▶▶▶ 골프장에서 지출한 골프비용은 학교법인이 운영하는 ▶▶▶▶▶▶ 골프장 오픈기념으로 대학 발전에 애쓰는 공소외 2 대학교 교무위원들을 대상으로 골프장 홍보와 대학구성원간의 화합의 장을 만들기 위해 마련된 것으로 당일 행사에 서울캠퍼스와 ☆☆캠퍼스 교무위원 19명이 참석하였으며 그 비용을 피해자가 결제한 것이었을 뿐 피해자와 공소외 3이 자신들의 불륜관계를 위한 것이 아니었다.

In addition, since September 2010, when Non-Indicted 3 had served as president, most of the golfs in which the victim participated were invited by the ○○○ market, broadcasting company officers, school foundation directors, school school foundation members, president groups affiliated with school foundation members, developers of the development fund, and other presidents of universities, etc., which was the time when Non-Indicted 3 had served as president, and this was a full refund of duties

On the other hand, in particular, Nonindicted 3 purchased goods at the Japanese department store did not have any relation with the victim, and the victim did not have purchased high-priced goods or golf products at the department store and duty-free shop at the destination, and all the money paid by the president was used directly or indirectly for the promotion of the pertinent business.

"2013 Highest 7947"

1. Violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection;

At around 08:40 on May 8, 2013, Defendant 1 sent the trade union’s e-mail (e-mail address 5 omitted) to Nonindicted University 2’s faculty members, along with the phrase “Non-Indicted 1’s additional statement of non-Indicted 1 chairman, such as the attached file,” along with the text “Non-Indicted 1 chairman’s additional statement of non-Indicted 1 chairman.”

In the file of “3. 3. Improper Expenditure of the corporate card of the chief director - Nonindicted 1’s corporate card for the period from September to March 2013, 2013, the total amount of KRW 32,000,000,000,000 including personal golf out of this, was disbursed 7,000 won - In addition to the excessive golf expense expenditure, the fact that, after purchasing high-priced goods at the department store and duty-free shop of the overseas destination, it was additionally confirmed that the school corporation would pay the said amount (the detailed statement confirmed through the corporate card expenditure was stated in the general competition, “the general competition,” which is the “the special audit of the educational division and the demand for the resignation of the chief director”.

However, business promotion expenses paid to the victim for one year are more than KRW 200 million, including the corporation card, and the golf expenses paid by the victim by the corporation card were paid for the public performance of the duties of the president of the school juristic person as above, and did not have been spent for personal purposes. Moreover, the victim did not purchase high-priced goods with the corporation card at the department store and the duty-free shop in the overseas travel area, or purchased golf products. The defendant also presumed that Nonindicted 3 purchased high-priced goods at the department store and the duty-free shop in the above special audit application (the second paragraph), and stated that Nonindicted 3 purchased high-priced golf products at the department store and the duty-free shop, and Nonindicted 3 purchased high-priced golf products.

Nevertheless, with the intention of slandering the victim, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly exposing false facts through the information and communications network.

2. Defamation;

On May 9, 2013, at around 12:00, the Defendant, prior to Nonindicted University 2’s Administrative Officers, destroyed the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false information by distributing printed items, “The additional statement related to Nonindicted Party 1 president,” in which the false information, which was sent by e-mail, was included in the meeting called “the general audit of educational department and the demand for resignation of Nonindicted Party 1 chairman”, which was held in front of Nonindicted Party 2’s Administrative Officers, including 100 unspecified number of people present at the place of the meeting, and the general event called “the general event of the public, which is a crime-related one”,

" 2014 Highest 5870"

1. Violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection;

A. On May 7, 2013, Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 sent to Nonindicted University 2’s professors, using the title “official e-mail account of the Faculty Council” (e.g., e., e-mail address 4 omitted), along with the file “public disclosure of the additional interest of the president of Nonindicted Party 1 and the total vacancy” at a non-permanent place (e.g., “public disclosure of additional interest of the president of Nonindicted Party 1).”

In the file "Public Disclosure of the Additional Profit for Non-Indicted 1 Chairperson", "3. Cru. 3. The unjust expenditure of the corporate card of the chief director - Non-Indicted 1 chief executive officer spent 3.2 million won with the corporate card for two and six months from September 2010 to March 2013, which used a total of 7,000,000 won including personal golf - In addition to the expenditure of excessive golf expenses, it was additionally confirmed that in addition to the expenditure of excessive golf expenses, it purchased high-priced goods at the department store and duty-free shop of the overseas travel site, or purchased golf goods, it was further confirmed that the school juristic person would pay the amount (the detailed interest confirmed through the payment of the corporate card in accordance with the details of the corporate card)."

However, most of the golf expenses paid by the victim with the corporate card was settled for the public performance of the president of the school juristic person, and did not have been spent for personal purposes, and there was no fact that the victim purchased high-priced goods with the corporate card at the department store and the duty-free shop in the overseas travel area or purchased golf products.

Nevertheless, the Defendants, in collusion with the above Defendants 1 and others, revealed publicly false facts through the information and communications network, thereby impairing the reputation of the victims.

B. On June 17, 2013, the Defendants sent the official e-mail account of the professor Council to the professors of Nonindicted University 2, along with the title “(e.g., 4 omitted) of “E-mail account” through “E-mail (e.g., e-mail address 4 omitted)” (hereinafter “E-mail”) and the text “E-mail-based efforts and activities for the justice of non-Subrogation”. In the above file, the said files were sent to the professors of Nonindicted University 2, who made every effort for the protection of the ▽▽▽△○ Institute. The issues pointed out at the time of executing the corporate card of the chairman of the L/C.m. - the president spent 320 million won with the corporate card from September 2010 to March 2013, 70 million won with the public fund and the amount of KRW 350 million with the name of the president’s KRW 20 million with the public fund and KRW 300 million with the name of the president’s KRW 2500 million.

However, most of the golf expenses paid by the victim with the corporate card was settled for the public performance of the president of the school juristic person, but did not be spent for personal purposes, and the victim did not purchase high-priced goods with the corporate card at the department store and the duty-free shop in the overseas travel area or purchased golf products for personal purposes.

Ultimately, the Defendants, in collusion with the above Defendant 1, revealed publicly false facts through an information and communications network for the purpose of defamation, thereby impairing the reputation of the victim.

2. Defamation;

피고인들은 위 피고인 1 등과 함께 2013. 5. 9. 12:00경 공소외 2 대학교 행정관 앞에서 개최된 ‘교육부 특별감사와 공소외 1 이사장 사퇴 촉구를 위한 〈범 ▽▽인 총궐기 대회〉라는 집회에서 그곳에 참석한 불특정 다수의 사람들 100여명과 언론 기자들에게 위 제1의 가.항 기재와 같이 이메일로 발송하였던 “공소외 1 이사장 관련 추가비리 의혹”이라는 유인물을 배포하였고, 온라인 뉴스매체인 ♣♣♣♣ 2013. 7. 24.자 기사에 『’2년간 1억 1천만원‘ ▽▽대 총장·이사장 ’호화골프 논란‘』제목으로 ‘2년간 법인카드로 3억 9,900만원 지출’, ‘국내외 골프장서 138회 결제’, ‘유흥주점·백화점 등서도 수백만원씩 사용’ 등 피해자가 수년 간 법인카드를 개인적인 용도로 유용한 것이 드러났다는 취지의 허위 내용이 보도되도록 하였다.

Accordingly, the Defendants, in collusion with the above Defendants 1, damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

2. Determination

A. The following facts can be acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court.

(1) After Non-Indicted 3 resigned from the president, the Non-Indicted 3 appointed Non-Indicted 3 as the president of Non-Indicted 2’s university, and Non-Indicted 3 held office as president, the Non-Indicted 3 was also subject to a campaign demanding the victim to retire from the office of president on the ground that the corporate embezzlement, etc. committed by Non-Indicted 3 while in office as president was committed under the victim’s secret protection and multiple profit-making businesses led and implemented by the victim also significantly aggravated the finance of Non-Indicted 2’s university.

(2) While the Emergency Countermeasure Committee submitted an application for special audit as stated in the facts constituting an offense in the educational finance book in the course of the victim's withdrawal movement, it received the specifications and approval statement of the use of the corporate card used by the victim and Nonindicted 3 in the same manner as the facts constituting an offense in order to verify whether various public funds of Nonindicted 2 University have been properly executed, as the educational finance book did not take any particular measures.

(3) 피고인 1을 비롯한 비상대책위원회는 입수된 위 사용내역서 및 승인내역서를 분석하여 그 분석된 결과 등을 토대로 위 공소사실 기재와 같이 특별감사신청서(2차)를 교육재정부에 제출하고, 이어서 피해자가 법인카드 등을 부당하게 사용하였다는 등의 의혹(1. ♥♥♥♥ 등 임대상가 특혜 제공 의혹, 2. 법인 공금 횡령 적발과 동시에 법인 핵심관계자 2명 돌연 퇴사, 3. 이사장의 법인카드 부당지출 의혹)을 제기하는 공소사실 기재의 ‘공소외 1 이사장 추가 비리 의혹’, ‘범비대위의 정의로운 노력과 활동사항을 말씀드립니다(최종)’라는 파일과 유인물 등을 공소외 2 대학교 교수 및 직원들에게 이메일로 송부하거나 배포하였다.

(4) After the submission of the above application for special audit (Second), the education re-government conducted an audit of the school juristic person, and pointed out the problems in the management and administration of the property of the school juristic person including the victim of the audit results, and issued a corrective order. Upon the request of the school juristic person according to the corrective order, the victim deposited the amount of KRW 13 million in relation to the use of the corporate card for which its use is unknown and KRW 100 million in relation to overseas business trips

(5) Separately, the victim was charged with the facts charged that he arbitrarily used the amount of KRW 130 million for personal purposes, such as personal travel expenses, and embezzled the amount of KRW 130,000,000,000 for out-of-the-counter equipment to Seoul Eastern District Court 2014 High Court 239, and acquired the corporate card for a private purpose, and is currently pending trial.

B. In full view of the circumstances and judgments as seen above, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendants had damaged the reputation of the victim by transmitting or distributing the files and printed materials with a false fact for the purpose of slandering the Defendants, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

(1) In determining whether the facts are false, it should be determined whether the part that is inconsistent with objective facts is important by examining the purport of the overall contents of the alleged facts in question. This article points out individual use of the victim’s corporate card, such as excessive golf expenses, travel, purchase of department store products, etc. The overall purpose of this article is to point out the problems arising from the use of corporate card based on the result of analyzing the specifications of the use of corporate card. The victim appears to have used corporate card for personal purposes, such as golf expenses or travels with the corporate card (the purchase by Nonparty 3), which is not less than 70 million won but less than 70 million won, and the victim appears to have purchased the department store or duty-free shop product with the corporate card. The victim returned part of the money to the school juristic person and criminal trial for the victim is under way, while the victim’s improper relation is discussed in the victim’s corporate card use, it is difficult to readily conclude that the defendants made a false statement in light of the fact that there is no statement about the above file or incentive.

(2) The victim, as the chief director of the school juristic person, has to be criticized for its operation, and the Defendants raised issues with the suspicion of using the victim’s unfair corporate card in the course of demanding the withdrawal of the victim’s school juristic person’s operation. This is often a part of contributing to the formation of public opinion in the school or the public debate on public interest issues. Moreover, the whole purport of the text sent or distributed is to urge the victim to leave the school by using the victim’s unfair corporate card. In full view of these circumstances, it is difficult to deem that there was a purpose of slandering the Defendants.

3. Conclusion

Thus, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, a judgment of innocence is rendered pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment of innocence on Defendant 3 pursuant to Article 58(2) of

Judge Lee Jin-hee