beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Although Defendant written comments on Twitter as stated in each of the facts charged in this case, Defendant did not have any false content as to the facts charged in paragraph 1 of the original judgment, but did not have any purpose to prevent H from being elected. ② The facts charged in paragraph 2 of the original judgment did not have the purpose of slandering, and was for criticism and public interest. ③ As to the facts charged in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the original judgment, there was no intention to slander or insult, and in particular, there was no false fact related to the facts charged in Articles 3-Ra and 3-Ra of the original judgment, and 5 and 6 of the original judgment, and even if there were no false facts or there was no purpose of slandering, the lower court convicted Defendant of all the facts charged in this case by misapprehending the legal doctrine.
B. The sentence of the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant by the prosecutor (one year of suspended execution in April of imprisonment with prison labor for a year of suspended execution, 2, 3, or 4 of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of 1, 5, or 6 crimes as indicated in the judgment of the lower court) is too unfasible and unjust.
2. Determination
A. 1) With respect to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, a person who actively asserts that there was no suspicion against a person who asserts that there was no suspicion in the crime of publishing false facts related to the facts stated in paragraph (1) of the lower judgment, bears the burden of presenting materials supporting the existence of such a fact, and the prosecutor may prove the falsity by impeachmenting the credibility of the materials presented.
At this time, it is not sufficient to simply present a written answer in light of the above legal principles. At least, it shall be equipped with the concreteness that the prosecutor's verification activity on falsity is practically feasible, and there is no presentation of such explanatory materials or presented explanatory materials.