An appellant said in his grounds of appeal that the appealed ruling by which two convicted persons were acquitted from publishing a report that insulted him had insufficient evidence of causation. He said that the court established the ruling on the grounds that the report did not including insulting phrases though the report included many offensive phrases against him.

The court of cassation said that this argument was invalid. The court said that the documents of the case revealed that the report did not include insulting phrases against the appellant. The court said that the freedom of opinion was protected by the constitution and the relevant laws on the condition that this opinion did not hurt the dignity or reputation of the relevant party. The court said that the documents of the case revealed that the report did not hurt the appellant's reputation.

The court dismissed the appeal.