지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Considering great social influence of Internet and other information and communication networks these days, On-line Service Provider(OSP) should be responsible for illegal activities regarding its information and communication service when it does not take proper actions against the illegal activities despite acknowledgement.
This paper examined OSP's civil liability and criminal liability from point of view of the Criminal Act. As a result, OSP's criminal liability shall be limited to ‘aiding and abetting by omission’ only when OSP's access and control against illegal contents are objectively admitted.
Despite aforementioned legal theory, OSP's criminal responsibility of others' defamation on information and communication networks shall be prudently admitted. This is because OSP's admission of criminal responsibility can reinforce regulations on OSP's information and communication services to give chilling effects and to be likely to weaken freedom of expression that is basic rights of the Constitution. Therefore, the obligation of caution can cognize infringement upon others' legal interests caused by posts of evident illegality, and it should be limitedly admitted within specific scope that can be controlled.
Defamation not only being illegal activities of the Civil Law but also being crimes of the Criminal Law have a lot of common factors, and conditions of criminal responsibility are stricter than the ones of civil responsibility are: Considering such a fact, when OSP's criminal responsibility based on others' defamation on Internet is decided, conditions of civil responsibility that have been recently suggested by civil judgment (2008DA53812) shall be minimum conditions that can admit of criminal responsibility.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0