메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류
인문학
인문학 일반 역사학 철학 종교학 어문학 기타 인문학
사회과학
사회과학 일반 경영학 관광학 교육학 군사학 문헌정보학 법학 사회학 신문방송학 심리과학 정치외교학 지리학 행정학 경제학 무역학 인류학 기타 사회과학
자연과학
자연과학 일반 물리학 생물학 생활과학 수학·통계학 천문학 지구과학 화학 기타 자연과학
공학
공학 일반 건축공학 기계공학 산업공학 재료·에너지공학 전기전자공학 조선해양공학 화학공학 컴퓨터학 기타공학
의약학
의학 일반 간호학 수의학 약학 한의학 기초의학 임상의학 기타 의약학
농수해양학
농수해양학 일반 농학 수산학 식품과학 임학 축산학 해상운송학 기타 농수해양학
예술체육학
예술 일반 디자인 미술 미용 사진 음악학 의상 체육 공연매체예술 기타 예술체육학
복합학
학제간연구 과학기술학 뇌인지과학 기술정책 기타 복합학

ENG

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
박범영 (국회) 한효주 (국회)
저널정보
법조협회 법조 법조 제65권 제5호
발행연도
2016.1
수록면
300 - 338 (39page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
As Byon, ○○(Representative Media Watch) writing on his Twitter in March 2012 “Lee, ○○ is a(the Kyonggi Eastern Union) manageress.” “Due to the nature of the organization Jongbuk NL faction, Lee, ○○ even has no rights to judge. She is a just follower of that organization.” etc. He described the couple Lee, ○○ and Sim, ○○ as Jongbuk NL faction. Accordingly, Lee, ○○(former Representative of Unified Progressive Party) and her husband Sim, ○○(lawyer) had filed a lawsuit for damages due to defamation. However, the Seoul High Court (2014.8.8 2013나38444) borrowed ‘Jongbuk’ and ‘Chinbuk’ concept, which is not in the dictionary and is not clear whether there is social consensus or not. Seoul High Court judgment was the expression ‘Jongbuk’, ‘NL faction’, ‘Kyonggi Eastern union membership’ to be true. Seoul High Court easily configured the jurisprudence that honor is compromised, for a reason the social prestige and reputation of the plaintiff was seriously damaged. However, the public has considered the concept of ‘Jongbuk’ as the tendency to agree or to act favorably for North Korea, or the people universally supporting and defending for North Korea. Thus, the expression ‘Jongbuk’ may be a true opinion, not a fact. In addition, the expression ‘Kyonggi Eastern union membership’ and ‘NL faction’, also referred to a person's general behaviors or tendencies, etc. Therefore it is not a matter of the area of fact, but the area of the opinion. Brennan Justice of the US Supreme Court presented the meaningful minority opinion on criteria for distinguishing between facts and opinions we should consider at Milcovich v. Lorain Journal Co., incident, - “type of language”, “meaning of this statement in context”, “proven potential”, “the social environment in the statement”. In the expression ‘Jongbuk’, ‘NL faction’, ‘Kyonggi Eastern union membership’, we need to apply the same criteria. When we follow the same criteria, the expressions that the Seoul High Court approved of the fact would be estimated to be close to opinions rather than facts. In this context, although the Seoul High Court configured the jurisprudence of the judgment about corpus delicti of Defamation, it is an unfortunate part that the court didn’t access precisely on the expression ‘Jongbuk’, ‘NL faction’, ‘Kyonggi Eatern Union membersip’. It is regrettable the court missed the crucial part of the judgment. In recent news from public service broadcasting, the defamation is caused by anchors, announcers and the panels by passing a personal opinion without filtration rather than fact. Also, it becomes possible to exchange recent public opinions through an interactive internet broadcasting, not to simply deliver only true. And it frequently occurs to exchange views and comments made by the public together with. Given these points, in order to resolve the conflict between the freedom of expression and the rights of honor, a distinction between opinions and facts is needed. It becomes more important than ever. The new jurisprudence of the Court to opinions and facts, and establishing criteria are required in the future.
#opinion #fact #defamation #Jongbuk #NL faction #Kyonggi Eastern Union Membership #criteria for distinguishing between facts and opinions #theory of the distinction between facts and opinions #Restatement of the Law #freedom of expression

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (18)

참고문헌 신청
계희열 / 2007 / 헌법학 (중) / 박영사 google schola 박용상 / 2002 / 표현의 자유 / 현암사 google schola 신평 / 2011 / 한국의 언론법 / 높이깊이 google schola 장영수 / 2015 / 헌법학 / 弘文社 google schola 권태상 / 2014 / 사실과 의견의 구별 / 민사판례연구 (36):697~742 google schola

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0