logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.05.16 2018노2664
명예훼손등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Costs of trial in the trial shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal: misunderstanding of facts;

A. As to defamation, the Defendant did not have made a statement to E in the same way as the facts charged by telephone around March 2017.

B. As to the violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., the Defendant did not send F the victim the same as the entries No. 1 to 10 in the annexed crime list of the lower judgment.

2. Determination

A. First, as to the assertion of mistake of facts as to defamation, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① E was present not only at an investigative agency but also at a court of the court below, and the court below acknowledged the credibility of its statement, and there are no circumstances suggesting that the judgment of the court below was erroneous, as stated in the facts charged, as to the credibility of E’s statement, and ② the Defendant, even before committing the instant crime, made another person speaks of the false facts against the victim, or sent text messages and F that cause fear or apprehensions to the victim, and accordingly, received a summary order of KRW 5 million on January 26, 2017. ③ After such criminal punishment, the Defendant did not repeatedly send another person the words as described in the facts charged, or send text messages and F that arouse fears fear or apprehensions to the victim. However, the following facts are asserted.

As seen in the above paragraph, the Defendant’s above assertion is difficult to believe as it is, and ④ the Defendant sent text messages and F containing the content that “C” is “C” to the victim on or around October 2016, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant, around March 2017, made a statement to E as described in the facts charged.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just and there is a defendant.

arrow