(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.10.27 2017노1248

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) 서울남부지방법원 2017.10.27 2017노1248

명예훼손

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts, misunderstanding of the legal principles) in light of the content of the instant notification sent by the Defendant to the victims, it is recognized that the Defendant filed a complaint or accusation against the victims on the charge of embezzlement.

In addition, the Defendant received only remuneration for executive officers “ without appropriating the ten-year allowance for the maintenance and repair of buildings” in the above notice.

This means that the victims have acquired only rights without fulfilling their obligations, which may cause a qualitative decline in the social value and evaluation of the victims.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On January 20, 2016, the Defendant’s summary of the facts charged in the instant case ought to pay and distribute the deposit money to the victim D, E, F, etc. with the amount of compensation for more than 5.30 members of the shopping district divided by five hundred and medium enterprises.

“The third party is accused of embezzlement of KRW 21 million that he/she leased as a registration director during the 8-year period of “(State).” The third party was charged of embezzlement of KRW 21 million that he/she leased as a registration director at his/her own knowledge, and the ten-year period of remuneration was not appropriated for the reserve fund for the maintenance and repair of buildings.

The document containing “,” etc. (hereinafter “the document of this case”) was drawn up and sent by mail to 550 owners of H classification.

However, there was no accusation of the victims due to the suspicion of embezzlement, and there was no remuneration for the registration director of the G in charge of the dispute resolution committee.

The Defendant, as seen above, damaged the honor of the victims by openly pointing out false facts.

B. The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant facts charged on the following grounds.

A. Therefore, the defendant was accused of the victims' embezzlement in the instant document.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2017.06.08 2016고정2616

-수원지방법원 2017.02.08 2016고단6284

-서울북부지방법원 2017.06.01 2017고정743

-수원지방법원 2017.09.15 2017노1574

-대전고등법원(청주) 2016.12.27 2016나10071