logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.06.19 2018고정855
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Victims C did not provide advice or advice to the National Intelligence Service in relation to the former President during the F-term of office as a professor of the E University Department in Seoul Special Metropolitan City D.

At around 19:51 on September 30, 2017, the Defendant was at the Defendant’s house located in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-do, and the “I” of Twitter (www. Twitter.com) which is an information and communications network, in the account, “I” was not one of the psychological scholars who consulted with him in connection with the former part of the J’s Strate State Authority’s examination, and the image snares, and the Defendant took part in the meeting.

With the content of “E (E)”, the screen (K) was displayed on the page of the Twitter account, including the descriptions of “E Department C professor”.

Accordingly, with the aim of slandering the victim, the Defendant posted a false fact openly through the information and communication network, thereby impairing the reputation of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Complaint;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes in writing (1) and writing (2) in writing by users of the Twitter account;

1. Article 70 (2) of the Act on Promotion of Utilization of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc., concerning facts constituting a crime and Article 70 of the relevant Act;

2. Article 70 (1) and Article 69 (2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse.

3. Determination of the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order (the grounds of conviction)

The argument is asserted.

"Purpose of slandering a person" in Article 70 (2) of the Act on Promotion of Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc. is to express the content and nature of the relevant timely fact, the scope of the party against which the relevant fact was published, the method of expression, etc.

arrow