beta
Text
The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.
Reasons
1. On April 17, 2012, the Defendant in the facts charged: (a) at the office of the D Housing Reconstruction and Improvement Project Association in the Guri-si, Si, Guri-si; (b) at the office of the victim E, even though the victim did not receive unjust money from the representative F of the rearrangement Project in relation to the housing rearrangement project, he prepared a certificate of contents stating that the victim received the bribe from the representative of the rearrangement Project; and (c) the Defendant attached a transcript of the recording conversations with the head of the said Housing Reconstruction Association G and F to the effect that the victim received unjust money, such as KRW 10,000,000,000 from the representative of the rearrangement Project; and (d) had the said accounting staff serve the said accounting staff by mail to H and I, a partner.
Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.
2. Determination
A. It is likely that H and I’s alleged performance and intentional performance are likely to spread to many and unspecified persons the facts indicated in the H and I’s record of content certification and recording of the instant case.
[In the facts of prosecution, although it is stated that the defendant had an accounting employee send the certificate of content, the purpose of prosecution does not seem to have been included in the elements of the act, and even if so, it is probable to view that the purpose of prosecution is not that of the accounting employee, even if so, it does not correspond to the appointment of the accounting employee. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the request for delivery of content certification to the accounting employee cannot be seen as a "defensive fact," and therefore, it is considered only whether the act of sending content certification, etc. to H, H, H, and I is a director of the reconstruction association. The victim, H, and I are all former promoters, and they oppose the operation of the association head and the defendant, etc., and were engaged in the activities of the Emergency Countermeasure Committee
The content certification of this case is on the side of the president of the partnership.