logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.04.04 2017노2281
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The contents of the instant article posted by the Defendant of the gist of the grounds for appeal revealing that the honor of the victim was damaged because the victim was not specified.

shall not be deemed to exist.

In addition, the defendant only posted his opinion or comment in the form of a forum, and does not indicate the fact.

Meanwhile, even if the article stated the facts, it cannot be viewed as false facts because the important part of the contents of the article is consistent with objective facts, and even if it is false facts, the defendant did not have any false perception.

In addition, the defendant, as a reporter, only prepared articles with public interest purposes, and did not intend to defame the victim.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles and affecting the conclusion of judgment.

Judgment

In order to establish a crime of defamation by publication, etc. under Article 309(2) of the Criminal Act as to whether a victim is specified, the victim should be identified based on the publicly alleged false facts, but the article or image itself, which is published without a person’s name, etc., makes it difficult to recognize the victim by itself, even if the contents of the expression are not clearly indicated, in full view of the surrounding circumstances, the victim’s identity can be identified, and if there are many people who know the fact, the victim is specified.

It can be said that (see Supreme Court Decision 89Do1744, Nov. 14, 1989). This legal doctrine also applies to the crime of violation of the Act on Promotion of Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc. (Defamation).

Comprehensively taking account of the following facts acknowledged by the Health Team, the lower court, and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the trial court as to the instant case, it can be seen that the “candidate for the president of a cooperative” referred to in the instant article was the victim, although the real name of the victim was not shown in the instant article, and that the said article constitutes the victim.

arrow