(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.06.30 2015노2437 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.06.30 2015노2437

명예훼손

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The decision of the court below that recognized the Defendant, although the Defendant did not make a statement to the same purport as the facts charged of this case, it erred by misapprehending the fact, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Summary of the facts charged

A. On May 2013, the Defendant: (a) updated F in the E market located in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, and destroyed the victim’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts; (b) even though the victim G did not take back the Defendant’s wall or stolen money; (c) in the presence of 5-6 persons, including H, there was no fact that the victim G has taken back the Defendant’s wall or stolen money; (d) thereby, he brought money to the victim; and (e) thereby, damaged the victim’s reputation.

B. At around 18:00 on August 11, 2014, the Defendant followed the Defendant “on the part of the Defendant, before I/L in the E market, money from I/L within this year”;

The victim’s reputation was damaged by openly pointing out false facts in the 20th place, such as J, etc., stating that “I am with 700,000 won and am with 700,000 won.”

3. Determination

A. The lower court determined that each testimony of H, G, and J, consistent with the facts stated in the lower judgment, is reliable in light of the background, content, consistency, etc. of the statement, and the facts acknowledged in the case where the Defendant accused the victim as a crime of insult, and did not accept the Defendant’s assertion in accordance with the facts stated in the lower judgment, and convicted the Defendant by recognizing the facts charged.

B. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, each of the facts alleged in the facts charged against H, G’s testimony, etc. by the statutory witness H, G, and the facts charged against the lower court (Defamation committed around August 11, 2014) can be acknowledged when comprehensively considering the testimony, etc. by the legal witness G, J, and K of the lower court, and each of the aforementioned testimony is credibility in the above statements in light of its content and consistency.

Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on each of the instant charges.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2015.06.04 2014고정2844

-부산지방법원 서부지원 2018.07.03 2018고정300

-부산지방법원 2015.09.16 2015고정920

-전주지방법원 군산지원 2013.01.15 2012고정876

-인천지방법원 2020.11.05 2020고정1522