logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.16 2016고단9544
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

around 14:40 on July 21, 2016, the Defendant sent and received text messages using the above “Kakao Stockholm Stockholm” as a matter of the group use method of the victim G (n, 23 years old) working at the same restaurant in the F of the same restaurant in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and the mobile phone display method used by the employees of the above restaurant.

The defendant, while communicating with the victim by means of a text message, intends to leave the head of the male-friendly division from the victim.

’ 는 문자 메시지를 받은 것에 화가 나 ‘ ㅗ’ (fuck you의 은어) 라는 문자 메시지를 보낸 것을 비롯하여 2016. 7. 21. 14:40부터 같은 달 28. 10:46까지 사이에 별지 범죄 일람표 기재와 같이 14회에 걸쳐 피해자에게 문자 메시지 등을 보냈다.

Accordingly, the defendant has repeatedly reached the victim with words, signs, and codes causing fears or apprehensions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to H, I, J, and K;

1. Each statement of L, M and N;

1. Application of the Kakao Stockholm and text messages (in the case of submission on July 30, 16) legislation

1. Article 74 (1) 3 and Article 44-7 (1) 3 of the Act on Promotion of the Utilization of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, etc., concerning facts constituting an offense, the relevant Article of the Act and Articles 74-7 (1) 3 (Selection of Penalty) of the same Act;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the defense counsel’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order

1. The text message sent by the Defendant to the victim by his defense counsel does not constitute “a code or language that arouses fear or apprehension,” and does not constitute a case where the Defendant sent the text message to the victim by “ repeatedly”.

2. The phrase “inciting fear or apprehension” under Articles 74(1)3 and 44-7(1)3 of the Act on Promotion of the Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc. is repeated.

arrow