모욕죄에 있어서 피해자의 특정과 집단표시에 의한 모욕죄의 성부- 대상판결 : 대법원 2014. 3. 27. 선고 2011도15631 판결

The case in contempt, it is generally required that the victim is identified. On the other hand, case law and doctrine about whether the establishment of contempt by the so-called group defamation in the presence of the requirements of some elements, it is possible to recognize and its formation. It may be not taken any position in principle, but satisfied to exceptional. Under what conditions it can be contempt by group defamation is the main issue. In Germany, I suspect, "the possibility of view" is its core standards. While introducing the "intensity of suspicion" to come look at the reference core the "size of the group" Initially, precedents of the United States that seems to have become the basis of the case law of South Korea, in addition to group size, was introduced character of the group, the reputation of the member, such as the position of the victim within a group, a variety of criteria. In addition to this, there is shown a portion of a member, and is an important criterion also what points to all or did. This case is one in which remarks parliamentarians has refers to a group is dealing contemp female announcers. In this case, Supreme Court denied the establishment of contempt by reason of not identifying in group defamation. I do not agree with the logic of the rulling but consistent in its conclusions. The reason is because I think that punishment as a criminal offense of the honor infringement including contempt is not appropriate. Discussion that is based on the human rights of the constitutional and civil sanctions against honor infringement should be more active in the future.