logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.10.11 2012고정4933
명예훼손
Text

Defendants are not guilty.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case stated that the Defendants, around November 201, at the F Office of the 4th Eth of building in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-do, the victim G embezzled public funds, not the mental patient but the victim G. However, despite the fact that the victim G embezzled public funds, the Defendants stated that “G did not operate the company as a mental patient with recreation and entertainment, and did not work for the company by embezzlement of public funds while operating the company.”

As a result, the Defendants conspired in collusion to damage the reputation of the victim by openly pointing out false facts.

2. On the contrary, the Defendants consistently asserted that there is no fact from the investigative agency to the present court that there was no statement as to the facts charged in this case.

As shown in the facts charged in this case, there are statements in G investigative agencies and in this court, statements in H investigative agencies, H, I, J, K, L, and M’s factual confirmation.

However, the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the record, i.e.,: (a) G did not directly consider the Defendants’ statement as to the instant facts charged, but rather took place from N et al. employees; (b) however, around September 201, the time when said statement was made was earlier than around November 201, which was the time when the Defendants made the statement indicated in the instant facts charged; (c) N only stated in the investigation agency and this court that the Defendants made the statement, such as the date and time as indicated in the instant facts charged, and at the same place; (d) it was different from G’s statement (see, e.g., the Investigation Record), and (e) H stated that the Defendants made the said statement at the F Office around November 201, as stated in the instant facts charged, but in this court, the Defendants made the said statement again at the above office around October 1, 201 through the above restaurant.

arrow