logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 진주지원 2019.08.22 2019고정3
명예훼손
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Around May 17, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around 18:40 on May 17, 2018, the summary of the facts charged: (b) up to the taxi in Jinju to the E/F office in the front of the C cafeteria located in Jinju City, and (c) despite the fact that the victim G was the owner of the company, the Defendant damaged the victim G’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts by stating that “G was the owner of the company and went to the candidate of the chairman of the labor union. For this reason, when G was elected to the chairman, the trade union may cease to exist because it was in line with the company, and the E/F trade union was established.”

2. The judgment prosecutor seems to have prosecuted the Defendant on the ground that it is possible for the Defendant to spread the above words to one another. Thus, the Defendant seems to have publicly impaired the victim’s reputation.

Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act provides, “A person who defames a person by openly pointing out a false fact shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years, suspension of qualifications for not more than ten years, or a fine not exceeding ten million won,” and even if a statement of fact is publicly known, an act performed in a state without public performance is not punishable.

In relation to the interpretation of performance, judicial precedents interpret that it is a situation in which many and unspecified persons can recognize it, and where it is possible to spread the fact to others even if the facts are stated to one person, the public performance is also judged.

However, it is not easy to judge the possibility of spreading the private dialogue from the perspective of the offender, and it is unreasonable that the ambiguous concept is the elements of penal law. The Korean language is explained as "an obvious, clear, and consistent with the world." The expansion of criminal punishment between individuals is likely to excessively limit the freedom of expression, and it is not easy to judge the possibility of spreading the private dialogue from the offender.

arrow