logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.05.12 2017고정146
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 800,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. No person may defame another person by openly exposing any false fact through an information and communications network, in violation of the Act on Promotion of the Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc.;

그럼에도 피고인은 2015. 8. 27경 C가 자신의 페이스 북에 " 찰칵 찰칵 소리에 뒤돌아보니 복지관 이층에 폰이 보입니다.

합법적인 시위를 도둑 촬영하는 사람 뉩니까!

In writing, on August 27, 2015, “I, entrusted by D, and entrusted by D to the branch (victim E) without a welfare company’s certificate.”

It is so far, from the birth to the production of the sampling site, the sampling site is required.

D The reason is that he has been dystyed with a thickness of his highest duty.

In addition, the latter portion shall be received monthly wage while holding the position of the head of the office in charge of the religious affairs, and it is necessary to make efforts to acquire the qualification for several years.

In addition, even though it was fallen for several years, it did not waive it.

I, however, do not accept I, I.D.

In quality, it is different from those who begin from the bottom with the following based on the certificate of temporary position or welfare officer's qualification.

I would like to think and see this idea.

These have been involved in the past.

For example:

I written the comments "Woo-Woo".

However, the victim passed the first-class test of social workers at once, and there was no fact that there was a fall short of the first-class test.

Accordingly, the defendant, for the purpose of slandering the victim, openly prepared a letter containing false information that the victim failed to undergo a social worker examination for several years, thereby impairing the honor of the victim.

2. Definating;

A. On March 24, 2016, the Defendant criticizes the Defendant “a new wheels with no opening,” around 12:04 on the same day, as “F entered several times and E would make a document of appeal.”

arrow