Article 310 of the Criminal Code, the meaning of "serious facts", "public interests" and the criteria for its determination, which are the requirements for the exclusion of illegality.

In order to not punish any act that defames a person by openly pointing out facts, it is related to the public interest when objectively viewed that the alleged fact is related to the public interest, and an actor is also required to indicate the fact for the sake of the public interest. It is true or true, at least the fact was believed to be true, and there are reasonable grounds to believe such fact. Here, the term "real fact" means a fact that is in conformity with objective facts in light of the overall purport of its contents, and there is a little difference or somewhat exaggerated expression in the detailed contents. Furthermore, the term "public interest" includes not only the public interest but also the interest and interest of a specific social group or its entire members, and whether the alleged fact concerns the public interest or not is related to the public interest. At the same time, considering the contents and nature of the relevant fact, the scope of the other party to which the publication of the relevant fact was made, the method of expression itself, etc., as well as the overall circumstances of the expression itself, and it is not incidental to the motive or intent of the actor for the public interest or to exclude it from the main purpose of the public interest.

Article 310 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 99Do1543 delivered on October 9, 1998 (Gong1998Ha, 2715), Supreme Court Decision 99Do3048 delivered on June 8, 1999 (Gong1999Ha, 1437), Supreme Court Decision 99Do3048 delivered on February 11, 200 (Gong2000Sang, 740), Supreme Court Decision 98Do2188 delivered on February 25, 200 (Gong200Sang, 885), Supreme Court Decision 2001Do3594 Delivered on October 9, 201 (Gong2001Ha, 2501)

Defendant

Defendant

Daegu District Court Decision 2001No3199 delivered on June 25, 2002

The appeal is dismissed.

In order to not punish a person by publicly pointing out facts, a statement of fact is related to the public interest when objectively viewed that an actor is objectively, and therefore, the actor is also required to indicate the fact for the public interest. In addition, the expression of fact is true or true or at least the actor believed that the fact is true, and there are reasonable grounds to believe such fact. Here, the expression of fact is a fact that is consistent with objective facts in light of the overall purport of its contents, and there is little difference or somewhat exaggerated expression in the detailed contents. Furthermore, the expression of "public interest" includes not only the public interest but also the interest and interest of a specific social group or the whole members, and it includes not only the public interest but also the interest and interest of a specific social group or the whole members. Whether the alleged fact concerns public interest is determined by comparing the contents and nature of the statement, the scope of the other party to which the fact was published, the method of expression itself, etc., with the degree of harm or damage caused by such expression, and thus, the motive or purpose of application of Article 280 through 280 of the Criminal Act can not be excluded.

However, according to the various evidences duly examined and adopted by the court below and the court of first instance, the defendant produced printed articles as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance and distributed printed articles to the residents of Daegu Dong-gu without making full efforts to secure the truth as decided by the court below. In full view of all the circumstances such as the contents and nature of the above facts, the scope of the counter-party to whom the pertinent facts are published, and the method of expression, etc., the court below is just and justified in the judgment of the court below to the effect that it is difficult to see that the main motive and purpose of the above printed articles are for the public interest, because there is a considerable reason to believe that the contents of the printed articles are true, or that some detailed contents of the printed articles are merely a little difference from the truth, or that there is a somewhat exaggerated expression, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to defamation by publication,

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Song Jin-hun (Presiding Justice)