All
| TITLE | Supreme Court en banc Decision 2020Do5813 Decided November 19, 2020 【Bodily Injury; Defamation; Assault】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
|
[1] Meaning of and standard for determining “publicity,” as a constituent element of criminal defamation Whether the so-called “theory of propagation possibility,” the legal doctrine which has been established under the precedents, may be maintained with respect to publicity of criminal defamation (affirmative) [2] In the case where the criminal defendant was charged with defaming Party A by publicly alleging facts, exclaiming aloud, “that person is an ex-convict who has served out his/her sentence,” to Party A, while Party B, the husband of the criminal defendant, and Party C, a relative of Party A, were listening on a back street of Party A’s house, the case holding that the possibility of propagation cannot be seen to be denied solely on the ground that Party C is a relative of Party A, but seeing that many and unspecified persons were in a state to be able to recognize the speaker is rather reasonable as the criminal defendant declared loudly enough for other villagers to overhear the facts alleged in a public place with the intention of merely insulting or defaming Party A in the process of doing battle with Party A, and thus the publicity of the criminal defendant’s above remark is recognized |
|
