logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.05.29 2017노4536
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)등
Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the defamation of the Defendant (misunderstanding of the legal doctrine), the contents written in the former part of October 28, 2015, which the lower court found guilty, are all true and has been prepared for the public interest, such as eradicating school violence, so the illegality should be avoided pursuant to Article 310 of the Criminal Act.

In addition, the reason why the defendant prepared a leaflet is not to slander the victim, but to respond to the attitude of the victim's parent that denies the assault itself, and it is not illegal because all half of the victim's assault was made by collecting the intent of the parents.

B. In light of the fact-misunderstanding and misunderstanding of the legal principles (not guilty part of the lower judgment) as to defamation of the Defendant on November 6, 2015, the Defendant actively responded to news gathering, the interview of some facts by exaggeration, and the interview purpose is for private interest to induce the victim’s forced transfer, etc. rather than for the public interest, as a true fact, Article 20 of the Criminal Act, where illegality is excluded in a case of an act that is justified solely for the public interest, cannot be applied.

B) With respect to the violation of the Act on Promotion of the Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc. (Defamation) on November 7, 2015, the Defendant’s notice was made for the purpose of slandering the parents of the victim and his parents and the victim’s forced transfer of the victim rather than for the public interest, and thus, the illegality is not dismissed.

2) The lower court’s sentence that is unfair in sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion 1) The lower court determined based on the evidence duly adopted and examined as follows.

The degree of defamation that is damaged by the defendant's act is very large, and other facts charged ( November 2015).

arrow