(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.09.02 2015고정297

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.09.02 2015고정297

명예훼손

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 4, 2014, around 13:20 on September 4, 2014, the Defendant openly damaged the honor of the victim by publicly expressing that “E had not yet been sentenced to imprisonment due to interference with business and has not yet been sentenced to imprisonment,” at the D Underground Parking Site in Seo-gu Daejeon, Daejeon, that was caused by the problem of the victim E and parking expenses.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of each police suspect against F and G;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 307 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

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

1. The defendant's defense counsel on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserts that since the defendant's defense counsel during the process of explaining the situation that the victim did not have the right to receive parking fees to the police officer dispatched at the time of the instant case, there is no intention of defamation and there is no illegality since it stated for the public

In the crime of defamation, the criminal intent as a subjective constituent element is sufficient and does not require a purpose to impair reputation by recognizing the fact that the alleged fact causes damage to reputation by undermining the victim’s social evaluation. If the defendant made a statement such as the statement in the facts charged that he/she may hear from all in the place where the victim, occupant, and parking manager is located, the criminal intent of the subjective constituent element is to explain the circumstances of the dispute of this case to police officers.

Even if the defendant is not guilty, it is reasonable to see that the defendant has the intention of defamation.

In addition, the defendant mentioned the victim's past criminal history as stated in its ruling is not about the public interest, but also about the public interest.

참조조문

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2016.10.13 2016노1534

-대전지방법원 2016.06.01 2016고정371

-수원지방법원 2018.10.05 2018노3013

-창원지방법원 2013.06.20 2013노296

-대전지방법원 2018.10.26 2018노611