logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.01.23 2013노2639
명예훼손등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles cannot be deemed that the content indicated on the banner posted by the Defendant is merely an expression of opinion and is merely an expression of false facts. Even if not, there were reasonable grounds to believe that the Defendant’s writing on the banner was a fact-finding, and that there was a reasonable ground to believe that it was a fact-finding. Furthermore, the Defendant thought that the victim company occupied and used the road, constructed apartment buildings in excess of the floor area ratio, and posted the instant banner on the ground that no particular corrective measure was taken, even though the cracks occurred in the surrounding housing, such as the Defendant’s house, etc. due to the instant apartment construction. As such, the Defendant’s act was merely a statement of true facts for the public interest, and constitutes a ground for excluding illegality under Article 310 of the Criminal Act. 2) Interference with business affairs

At the time, the victim company did not take safety measures such as installing construction guide signs or traffic control signs on the roads used by the public on holidays, and doing so, the "business" subject to protection of the crime of interference with business cannot be deemed as "business", and even if the defendant interfered with such business, the crime of interference with business shall not be applied to

Since the defendant merely thought that the victim company was engaged in illegal work, the defendant's act constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate the social rules.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the assertion of mistake of facts is not necessarily limited to cases of direct expression of facts, but in light of the overall purport of such expression, even in cases of indirect and indirect expression of facts.

arrow