(영문) 대전지방법원 2013.09.25 2012노2832 | 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) 대전지방법원 2013.09.25 2012노2832

명예훼손

Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant (as to defamation around the end of 2009) did not speak to E by phone to the defendant as described in this part of the facts charged, and even if the defendant told E as above, the possibility of dissemination is not recognized, the court below convicted him of this part of the facts charged. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the fact that the prosecutor (as to defamation around October 2009) recognized the fact that the defendant found the Fluor Association and G also made a statement that corresponds to this part of the facts charged, the court below acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged even though the defendant acknowledged the fact that the defendant made a statement that corresponds to this part of the facts charged. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant

A. The Defendant, in 2009 of the facts charged, posted a phone call to E, the head of the Diplomatic Association, from the end of that year, to the end of that year, thereby impairing the honor of the victim by openly expressing the fact.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the Defendant’s statement to E as described in this part of the facts charged was recognized by a copy of the examination protocol of witness, etc., and that the possibility of dissemination is recognized in light of the progress of the previous dispute between the Defendant and the victim, relationship with the victim and E, and circumstances after the aforementioned speech.

C. In the crime of defamation of the court’s determination, “public performance” refers to the state in which many, unspecified persons can be recognized, and thus, if there is a possibility of spreading to many, unspecified persons even if they spread facts individually.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2018.05.30 2017노3909

-부산지방법원 2020.12.11 2020노1503

-의정부지방법원 2019.08.30 2018노2555

-부산지방법원 2012.12.21 2012노3271

-수원지방법원 2014.01.16 2013노4307