A. As indicated in the judgment of the court below, the Defendant posted the article of the title “B” as indicated in the judgment of the court below was intended to criticize that the tendency of the Plaintiff, an incorporated association, (hereinafter “G”), to which the Defendant led, was pro-North Korea in holding the “National Action for the Nullity of Agreement on the Event of Japan,” and that the overall purport of the article is a simple clerical error that omitted the expression “the spouse of the G officer and the attendance of the principal officer”, and thus, at the time of posting the article, there was no intent to impair the reputation of the victim’s G officers.

B. The Defendant, as a reporter belonging to E, the Internet media, committed surveillance and criticism by raising a question about the fact that executives of G, an organization that has raised the issue of the Japanese military perjury, which is a national interest, had been engaged in extreme decentralization for a long time. This is not only within the sphere of freedom of the press, but also the responsibility of the press.

In light of the fact that its illegality should be excluded.

2. Determination

A. The facts of recognition 1) G is an incorporated association established for the purpose of preventing sexual violence, preventing the restoration of Japan's sovereignty, and contributing to the peace of Asia and the world through the resolution of the problem of the Event of the Japanese War, which was committed by the border of Japan on June 10, 1997.

2) The Defendant, as the reporter of Internet media E, drafted the following articles:

3) On February 29, 2016, E published the following articles (hereinafter “instant articles”) as a title related to G.

The "National Action (hereinafter referred to as the "National Action") for the nullification of the Agreement on the Event of Japan and the Definition of the Agreement on the Event of Japan from BA to Seoul. (/f)