logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.09.15 2017고단3781
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)등
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

The summary of the facts charged is that the defendant and the victim B (the age of 23) are in a relationship with the former.

1. On June 16, 2017, the Defendant violated the Act on Promotion of the Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc. (Defamation) at the accommodation of the two mountain construction site offices located in Gyeonggi-si, Yangyang-gun, Gyeong-gun, the Defendant discarded the victim’s friendship C (M) using the Facebook message to the victim’s friendship C (M).

At present, it was difficult to do so.

“A transmission of the content,” etc.

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by exposing public facts through information and communication networks with a view to slandering the victim.

2. The Defendant of intimidation, around June 6, 2017, sent the victim with the text message of the mobile phone text message “I wish to send the message to the airline he/she seeks to find employment.”

“To prevent the frontway”, “to prevent widths.”

Until the end of the two parts, the victim was threatened by transmitting the contents such as “Aar.”

Judgment

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (Defamation) constitutes Article 70(1) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. and thus cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s will specifically manifested pursuant to Article 70(3) of the same Act. Intimidation constitutes Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent pursuant to Article 283(3).

According to the records, the victim B expressed his/her intention not to be punished on July 19, 2017, which was after the prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow