The lower court has acquitted a political activist accused by some security officials of violating the lese majeste and computer crime laws in 2016, saying the plaintiffs didn't have any eyewitnesses or solid evidence to back their allegations against the activist.
In the lawsuit, Harit Nahaton, 31, the acquitted defendant, was accused of defaming the high institution in his chats with Nattharika Warathanyawit, 48, via Facebook Messenger, between January and April 2016.
Ms Nattharika, who fled the country and is now believed to be living in the US, had allegedly used a Facebook account under the name Wararat Mengpramun to communicate with Mr Harit, said the same lawsuit.
The part of the lawsuit against Ms Nattharika, named as the second defendant in the same case, has been suspended ever since she fled the country.
The plaintiffs are a number of security officials who claimed to have gained access to the Facebook messenger account of both Mr Harit and Ms Nattharika, said Winyat Chatmontri, a lawyer representing the accused, after Tuesday's ruling.
The plaintiffs also claimed Mr Harit and Ms Nattharika gave them their Facebook messenger passwords prior to their detention at a military camp, which the two had denied, said the lawyer.
The plaintiffs also claimed that they had copied the two's chat history for use as evidence against them in this case, but a witness who is a university lecturer testifying for Mr Harit argued that these logs could easily have been doctored, said the lawyer.
Gen Wichan Chotdaeng, a key witness testifying for the plaintiffs, said he was only told about the alleged misconduct and didn't actually see the original version of the chat records in question himself, according to the ruling. The plaintiffs also failed to prove to the judge the Facebook account cited in the evidence against Mr Harit actually belonged to him.
Upon hearing the ruling on Tuesday Mr Harit expressed his gratitude to the judge for ensuring that justice was served.
He also said he wasn't going to file a counter suit against the security officials pursuing legal action against him in this case, as he believed they were only carrying out orders.