logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2018.07.18 2017고단1117
모욕
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

D. The defendant, the victim E is a person in the fourth and fourth year of the Gangwon National University.

피고인은 2017. 6. 14. 21:23 경 춘천시 G 207호 피고인의 주거지에서, 피고인의 스마트 폰을 이용하여 피고인, D, H, A, I, J 5명이 등록되어 있는 카카오 톡 단체 채팅 방에 D이 게시한 “E 저 새끼는 진짜 좀 맞아야 함 답도 없는 새끼” 라는 글에 대한 답 글로 “ 븅 신새끼 왜 말 안 나오나 했다” 라는 글을 게시하여 공연히 피해자를 모욕하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. The legal statement of witness E and H;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A complaint filed by E;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the records of conversations between the persons under consideration;

1. Relevant Article 311 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

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

1. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The assertion;

A. The Stockholm content submitted by the victim constitutes illegally collected evidence that infringes on the privacy of D and personal interests.

(b) A group hosting room of D, the Defendant, H, I, and J5 persons do not have any other person's portraits, and ordinary persons themselves;

Since the contents of dialogue between each other, as well as the contents of conversations divided into Kakaox, they did not reveal or show to others, this article posted on the above group hosting room has no possibility of dissemination, and there is no performance.

2. Determination

A. First, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court as to the first argument, namely, (i) D installed a Kakao Stockholm app (hereinafter “Kakax”) in a public PC and dialogueed with the Kakao Stockholm; (ii) the above public PC cannot be deemed as an infringement upon the victim’s privacy or personal interests, and (iii) D was placed in a public PC with the Kakao Stockholm as a whole.

arrow