logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2020.03.26 2019고정586
모욕
Text

1. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000;

2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine, it shall be 100.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

At around 11:59 on November 18, 2018, the Defendant visited the Facebook (www.fceoo.com) account, and made the face of the victim B and his female-friendly C and made it clear to the chest part of the chest, and then posted the above synthetic photograph, “this gue is D’s fceo.com,” and insulting the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. B Legal statement;

1. A protocol of partial police interrogation of the accused;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. Written complaint;

1. Evidential data 1- Pest notice closure data;

1. Account for 2-A Lone Star Program;

1. Evidential materials 3-A pets north of this paper: 1. Evidential materials 4-A pets north of this paper;

1. Documentary evidence 5- Hexafol data of “Deprison BNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNE

1. Evidential materials of 6-Influence A written comments posted by 6-Influence-gu C, 000, both of which are 6-influences;

1. Data for the closure of a conversation message B and A from 7-Sone Star Program to 7-Sone Star Program;

1. If 8-A serves as a private teaching institute evidentiary material, a notice concerning a street station;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the closure of data containing 9-A written evidence 9-A;

1. Article 311 of the Criminal Act and Article 311 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. Judgment on the assertion of the defendant and defense counsel under Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act that bear litigation costs

1. The gist of the argument is that the defendant and his defense counsel did not prepare and publish a notice of the Pest Account (hereinafter “instant notice”) recorded in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the defendant, and the posting of this case was made and posted by a hacker’s name misconsing damage. Thus, the defendant and his defense counsel asserts that the crime of insult is not established.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances, the evidence duly adopted and examined in the judgment of the court below, the Defendant prepared the instant bulletin.

arrow