▲ The above picture is not related to the content of the article.


A woman who reported that she had suffered sexual harassment by sending an e-mail to employees while leaving the company was found guilty of defamation in the first and second trial, but was acquitted by the Supreme Court. 



The 3rd division of the Supreme Court (Chief Justice Roh Jeong-hee) overturned the lower court's acquittal of 300,000 won in the appeal of Mr. A, who was charged with violating the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (Defamation), and dismissed the case in Seoul. It was announced today (24th) that it was returned to the Eastern District Court.



After expressing his intention to resign to the company in April 2016, Mr. A sent an e-mail with the subject 'Sharing and Recommending Cases of Sexual Harassment Victims' to the representatives of 208 stores nationwide and about 80 employees at the headquarters. was put on trial for defamation of the 



In the e-mail sent by Mr. A, there was additional harassment, such as 'I felt sexual shame towards Mr. B', 'Mr. B held his hand under the table at a gathering place', and 'Sit next to me.' ' is known to contain content. 




The 1st and 2nd trial judged guilty by saying that A sent an e-mail for the purpose of slandering Mr. B. He said that when he was working at the head office and was assigned to a local store, he suddenly took issue with his past behavior. A complaint was filed with the Seoul Regional Labor Office with the same content, but the acquittal was dismissed as a basis. 



The court of first instance said, "Even if it was inappropriate behavior as Mr. B, a married man at the time, there is room for the behavior of a man showing interest." When I received it, I sent an email,” he said, and sentenced him to a fine of 300,000 won. 



The second trial court said, "There are some inappropriate parts in the first instance that 'B's conduct may correspond to the behavior of a man showing interest', but it was found that Mr. It is justified," he maintained. 



However, the Supreme Court's interpretation was different. The Supreme Court said, "Mr. A sent an e-mail to help prevent sexual harassment at work and to relieve damage by sharing her case of sexual harassment." will," he judged. 



He continued, "In view of our society's perpetrator-centered culture, perception, and structure, Mr. A can feel anxious about secondary damage." it's difficult"  and explained.



This is a 'news pick'.

Keywords: