logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 논산지원 2018.01.09 2017고정185
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On May 27, 2016, the Defendant is a person who was elected at the Dong-dong President of the relevant apartment complex in the Myun-si of the Myun-si, Myun-si, Myun-si, Myun-si, Myun-si

On May 25, 2016, at around 07:17, the Defendant sent a text message to 15 persons including Lee Dong-dong E using his own mobile phone, including Lee Dong-dong E, senior citizens' chairperson, management director, and occupants, stating that “the victim has been in a position to manage and dispute with all other Dong-dong representatives during his/her representative term of office, with considerable difficulty in managing and operating it,” “If the victim is in a lump sum, it would cause considerable difficulty in managing the apartment by resignation of the majority of Dong-dong and the management director,” and “self-appellant has returned again to prevent the winning of the victim.”

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly duplicating facts through information and communication networks with a view to slandering the victim.

2. Determination:

A. The content of the instant text message asserted by the Defendant and the defense counsel is consistent with the fact, and the victim was unable to operate the apartment in the future, and it was judged that it was difficult for them to operate the apartment in the future, and thus sending some of the people interested in apartment management for the public interest of the apartment residents, and there was no intention to impair the honor of the victim.

Therefore, the defendant's act is dismissed as illegal and not guilty.

B. 1) First, the part that “if the victim is a victim at once, it would cause enormous difficulties in managing the apartment by withdrawing from the majority of the members of the Dong and the managing director,” and that “ he/she again left the apartment to prevent the winning of the victim,” is merely an expression of the Defendant’s opinion, and it is difficult to view it as a statement of specific facts against the victim.

2) “The victim shall be in charge of all other Dong representatives during the term of office of the representative.”

arrow