beta
Text
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
Reasons
1. Summary of the facts charged
A. The Defendant of defamation, on September 16, 2013, damaged the reputation of the victim D by sending a written statement of the purport of defamation to the head of the Suwon-gu post office located in Suwon-si, Suwon-si (hereinafter “C”) and to the head of the 15 City/Do branch offices of the C organization (hereinafter “C”), and by sending it by mail.
B. On September 16, 2013, the Defendant’s defamation using information and communications networks (hereinafter “F”), at the office of the C-do branch office in Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Seoul-si, (hereinafter “Seoul-do branch office”), and (hereinafter “D”) elected as the president, with the intent of enabling the president to leave the office and preventing the next election from being elected, thereby undermining the honor of the victim D by openly inserting an attachment on the website free bulletin board of “F” by using the Internet computer of the office.
2. Among the facts charged in the instant case’s assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel, defamation is related to the public interest and thus, the illegality is excluded by Article 310 of the Criminal Act, and defamation using the information and communications network does not constitute a crime since the purpose of defamation is not recognized.
3. Determination
A. Article 310 of the Criminal Act provides that the act of Article 307(1) of the Criminal Act provides that the act of defamation should not be punished if it is true and solely for the public interest. In this context, the term "when the publicly alleged facts relate to the public interest" refers to the public interest, and an actor also states the facts for the public interest subjectively. Whether the publicly alleged facts relate to the public interest or not should be determined by comparing and comparing the following circumstances with regard to the expression itself, such as the content and nature of the publicly alleged facts, the scope of the other party to which the publication of the relevant facts was made, the method of expression, etc., and the degree of infringement of reputation that may be damaged or damaged by the expression.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do8574, Sept. 29, 2011).