logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2012.07.13 2012고합151
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(음란물유포)
Text

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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From May 201, the Defendant was working as a member of the Broadcasting and Communications Deliberation Committee. From around July 20, 201, around July 20, the Defendant posted the Defendant’s house No. 103 of Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu E building No. 103, to “G” on the Defendant’s Internet Brogs, and displayed, on July 12, 201, the Defendant’s Internet Brogs, “G,” “G,” and the male sexual picture No. 7 and sponed off, which were discovered by the Broadcasting and Communications Deliberation Committee’s resolution as obscene information, as obscene materials, deeming one of the male’s rear frogic images, which are not included in the relevant Information and Communications Deliberation Regulations and the letter on sexual acts, as obscene materials, violates the freedom of expression, and openly displayed obscene images or videos through the information and communications network (hereinafter “instant notices”).

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol of examination of part of the defendant by prosecution;

1. The police statement of H;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on a black channel with a closure;

1. Article 74 (1) 2 and Article 44-7 (1) 1 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. The defense counsel and the defendant's assertion regarding the defense counsel and the defendant's assertion under Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Code of the Labor House Detention Act (hereinafter "the Act") include not only a sexual picture without a will on sexual acts, but also an overall view of the notice as a obscenity with the content of academic and critical consideration as to the results of deliberation. Thus, it cannot be deemed as obscene materials. ② The defendant, as a professor at I University Law School and a member of the Broadcasting and Communications Deliberation Committee, posted the instant notice on his/her personal photo, which was only 7 days a day, for the purpose of keeping the materials already disclosed during the deliberation process as a professor at I University and a member of the Broadcasting and Communications Deliberation Committee.

arrow