logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고등법원 2012.10.18 2012노459
공직선거법위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although there is a fact that the defendant published a letter as stated in the judgment of the court below on Twitter with the same contents as the statement in the judgment of the court below, this is merely intended to criticize C, which is a politics, and it does not publish a letter with the intention to slander C, which is registered as a candidate

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misunderstanding the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant alleged that there was a mistake of facts in the original judgment as alleged in the grounds of appeal for mistake of facts, and the lower court recognized the circumstances as stated in its reasoning based on the evidence duly adopted and examined, and rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the grounds that it was sufficiently recognized that the Defendant slandered C by posting the same article as stated in the judgment of the lower court for the purpose of preventing a candidate for a National Assembly member from being elected in an election. Thus, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the facts charged against the Defendant.

Examining the fact-finding and judgment of the court below in light of the records and related legal principles, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of misconception of facts as alleged in the grounds of appeal by the defendant.

B. There are favorable circumstances for the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant did not have any history of punishment for the same type of crime, and that the Defendant does not seem to have committed the instant crime in return for personal appraisal or any other consideration for a specific candidate.

However, the Defendant’s crime of this case is to ensure that the election of public officials, which is the basis of democratic politics, is carried out fairly in accordance with the free will of the people and democratic procedures, and to publish a letter that aims to slander a candidate.

arrow