logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.07.07 2015노7637
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)등
Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the prosecutor 1) 1) misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles - evidence submitted by the prosecutor without charge, etc., the defendant can be found to have been aware that the facts alleged as stated in this part of the facts charged are false, but at the time, G prepared a letter on behalf of K and S.

The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged on the ground that it seems true, is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (a sum of eight million won) is too unhued and unfair.

B. The above sentence sentenced by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. It is justified that the court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that there was no awareness that the facts alleged at the time were false based on the circumstances stated by the court below, even if the court below reviewed the evidence legitimately adopted and investigated in light of the records, and added up the testimony of the witness S of the trial room, it is reasonable to find the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, and there was an error of law by misunderstanding the facts alleged by the prosecutor

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

B. The fact that the Defendant repeatedly posted an article that impairs the honor of the victims for a long time is disadvantageous to the Defendant, such as the Defendant and the Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing.

However, the fact that the defendant has no particular criminal history, most of the facts alleged by the defendant appears to be true, there are extenuating circumstances in terms of the motive and background of the writing of this case, and the deletion of all the above writing after the fact is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, all the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, relationship with victims, etc.

arrow