beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. The Defendant is the vice-chairperson of the head of the Tong community service center in Dongjak-gu Office D, and the victim E is the auditor of the above head of the Tong Council.
On September 4, 2012, the Defendant displayed the summary order of the crime of violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc. (Defamation) issued by the Seoul Central District Court (hereinafter “Seoul Central District Court”) against the victims to request follow-up measures against the victims at the D community service center located in the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F, in accordance with the rules of the head of the Tong Council. On September 4, 2012, the Defendant said that “A fine of KRW 700,000 was imposed on the E” was imposed on the employees of
Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out facts.
B. On September 20, 2012, the Defendant told on September 20, 2012, the victim and the victim agreed to compromise the defamation case of the victim on June 6, 2012 in the I restaurant near the above community service center, and the victim spreaded the victim’s complaint to J, K, and Dongjak-gu Office during the time of the promise.
Accordingly, the defendant openly insultingd the victim.
2. Determination
A. As evidence consistent with this part of the facts charged, there is only a statement at E’s investigative agency and this court. E calls from the head of D to the effect that the Defendant was dismissed by the head of the Tong while speaking that the Defendant was issued a summary order to himself/herself at the time and place indicated in this part of the facts charged. Furthermore, the Defendant divided the conversation with the head of the administration team of the community service center at the time, and made statements to the effect that he/she was aware that he/she was detrimental to his/her reputation.
However, G and H, together with the date, time, place, etc. stated in this part of the facts charged, did not present a summary order for E, and the summary order for E was issued.