logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.03.08 2016고정591
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(명예훼손)
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. As shown in the separate sheet of facts charged

2. Determination

A. Legal doctrine 1) Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act or Article 61(2) of the former Act on Promotion of Utilization of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc. (amended by Act No. 8778 of Dec. 21, 2007) practically constituting the elements.

In order to establish the crime of defamation by publicly alleging false facts, the criminal must publicly indicate the fact, and the fact must be a false fact that impairs people's social evaluation, and the criminal should have recognized that such fact was false. If the important part here is consistent with objective facts, even if there is a little difference from the truth or somewhat exaggerated expression in detail, it cannot be viewed as a false fact (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do8863, Nov. 11, 2010, etc.). (2) “the purpose of slandering a person” as prescribed in Article 70(1) and (2) of the Act on Promotion of the Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc. requires the intention or purpose of harm, and whether there is a purpose of slandering a person, the purpose of which is not only the content and nature of the relevant publicly alleged fact, the scope of the other party to whom the relevant fact was published, the method of expression itself, etc., but also the purpose of the public interest should be widely compared not only to the public interest, but also to the extent of infringing or damaging the public interest.

arrow