(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.04.22 2014고정1465

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 2015.04.22 2014고정1465

명예훼손

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Around November 14, 2013, the summary of the facts charged is that the facts in the D General Affairs Division located in Daejeon Jung-gu, Daejeon, the Defendant’s husband E and the victim F are not in inhumanial relationship, but the Defendant’s husband E and six employees G, etc. of the General Affairs Department maintained an inhuman relationship with the Defendant for the non-inhumanity for the non-inhumanity for the non-inhumanity for the non-inhumanity for the non-inhumanity for the non-inhumanity for the non-inhumanity for the non-inhumanity for the non-inhumanity for the non-inhumanity for the non-inhumanity of the respondent’s spouse, and the applicant has recognized and used the non-inhumanity relationship for the past with the non-inhumanity for the non-inhumanty of the respondent.

2. Evidence that there is a criminal fact in the judgment criminal procedure should be presented by the prosecutor, and criminal facts should be proven by the judge so that the judge can have high probability to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to form such a degree of conviction, the defendant is suspected of guilt even if there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 92Do3327, Mar. 23, 1993; 2012Do6522, Aug. 23, 2012). In order to establish the crime of defamation of false information, the prosecutor must actively prove that the alleged fact is false.

The evidence corresponding to the facts charged in this case is only F's investigative agency and legal statement.

However, F stated in the police that "the relationship with E was worked in the same way as E, and was mixed with the phone around June 2012, F was used in the same way as E, and it was paid in the same way as E, with telephone and words." In the court, F was working in the same way as E and it was not related with E, and there was no right.

However, it is recognized that there are several meals, such as E, and they are frequently contacted.

참조판례

-대법원 1993. 3. 23. 선고 92도3327 판결

-대법원 2012.8.23.선고 2012도6522 판결

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2015.11.20 2015노1450

-대전지방법원 2014.10.29 2014고정435

-인천지방법원 2014.11.21 2013고정4683

-춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2012.11.15 2012노262

-대전지방법원 2015.06.17 2014고정2017