logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2016.01.27 2015고정1356
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is the person who uses the Internet NAVER Kafa B as the clinic called “C”.

In around 05:05 on November 18, 2014, the Defendant: (a) at the B Kafing room around 05:05, the fact that the victim D did not have received an agreement by deceiving a mentally ill person; (b) did not misrepresent himself/herself as a staff member of the law firm or spread personal information of the perpetrator; and (c) notwithstanding the fact that approximately 100 members had access to the above Bafing, they refer to “E” referring to “E” referring to the Baf from the Baf or the horse Kim.

“At the beginning of the content of “the filing of a complaint as a crime of insult” is the form of “the filing of a insult,” the perpetrator, who is a mental disease in the state of hospitalization, is receiving a criminal agreement and a civil agreement double, and approach the perpetrator, leading the perpetrator to enter into an agreement in the letter of our military and military system, spreading personal information of the perpetrator, spreading personal information of the perpetrator, acquiring secondary accusation data after accessing the perpetrator, and processing private information through other points.

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts with the aim of slandering through information and communications networks.

2. The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under Article 70(2) of the Act on Promotion of Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc., and may be prosecuted against the victim’s will specifically manifested pursuant to Article 70(3) of the same Act.

According to the records, the victim expressed his intention not to punish the defendant only after the prosecution of this case. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

arrow