부산 ㅇ○구 ㅇㅇ0동OO0-55

소송대리인 변호사 정ㅇㅇ

-The representative director Kimo

2. Trace;

3.박ㅇㅇ

4. Do governor; and

피고들 주소 부산 ㅇ구 ㅇㅇ동 1-10

[Defendant-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 10

[Defendant-Appellee]

2) Judgment

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff shall pay to the plaintiff ○○○○○ Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "the defendant newspaper company") 200 million won and the 200 million won of the above 200 million won, 5% per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of the judgment of the first instance, and 20% per annum from the day following the day of complete payment to the day of complete payment (the plaintiff reduced its claim against the defendant newspaper company at the trial).

3. The defendant newspaper technician;

(a) Of the pages other than the advertisement column of “OO” published for the first time after the conclusion of the judgment of this case, (i) the title of “OO” in the article publishing column 4, (ii) the title of “OO” as “OO” in the article publishing column 4, (iii) the title of “OO” as “OO” in the article publishing column 14, and (iv) the title of “OO” in the article publishing column 5 as “OO” in the article publishing column 14, (v) the title of “OO” in the article publishing column 8 as “OO” in the article publishing column 14, (iv) the title of “OO” in the article publishing column 3 as “14, 14, 4, 4, 4, 14, 4, 4, 14, 4, 4, 14, 4, 4, 4, 14, 4, 4, 14, 4, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 1.”

B. If the defendant newspaper company fails to comply with the above (1) through (3), it shall pay to the plaintiff the amount calculated by the ratio of one million won per day of the immediately published newspaper to one million won per day of the immediately published newspaper. If the defendant newspaper company fails to comply with the above (4), it shall pay to the plaintiff the amount calculated by the ratio of 2.5 million won per day of the immediately published newspaper to 2.5 million won per day of the immediately published newspaper.

The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the whole purport of the arguments in the statements in Gap evidence 1 to 4, evidence 10-1, 2, evidence 12-2, evidence 14, 15, and 25-1, 2, and evidence 39.

A. Status of the parties

원고는 OOO고와 ○○대학교 ○○○○학과를 졸업하고 ○○대학교 ○○대학원 에서 석사학위를 취득한 후 ㅇㅇ 0000대학교에서 OO박사학위를 취득하고, ㅇㅇ 시의회 의원으로 재직하다가 전 ( 前 ) 국회의원 (제○○대, ○○○당, 부산 ○○구)으로서 2004. 4. 15. 제17대 국회의원선거에서 OO OO 지역구에 무소속으로 출마하였으나 낙선하였고, 피고 신문사는 “OOOO”라는 일간신문을 발행하고 있으며, 피고 전○○, 박○○, 손○○은 피고 신문사의 기자들이다.

B. Contents of the Defendant newspaper articles alleged to have undermined the Plaintiff’s reputation

The Defendant newspaper published the following articles (hereinafter referred to as the “O00 articles”) in the “O00.” Among them, the articles of the following (1) are collected and recorded by Defendant ○○○○, Defendant ○○○○, and Defendant ○○○○, and Defendant ○○○.

(1) The article of April 22, 2002 No. 35 of the Act on April 22, 2002

No. 1. The head of the Si/Gun/Gu and the head of the Si/Gun/Gu have made a request for the submission of a list of 0,000 members of the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○.

(2) The article of the third page of April 15, 2003

제목 『 지역정치 틀 바꾸자 <2> ㅇㅇㅇ당 , 현안에 뒷북 생색엔 앞장 중진, 준비도 없고 노력도 않고 초·재선』 , 소제목 『 중진의원 당내서도 변방 … 당3역도 1명 도 없어, 초·재선의원 개인적 이유 의정활동 핵심자리 고사 』 의 기사 중 『▲기대에 못미치는 초·재선= “제가 예결위원을 꼭 맡아야 하나요. (저는) 아직 마무리해야 할 논문이 남아 곤란합니다. 다른 사람도 많지 않습니까?” 제16대 국회 초반, 여의도 정가에서 널리 화제 가 됐던 부산지역 한 초선 의원의 말이다. 예결위원직은 지역 현안을 해결할 수 있는 국회의 핵심적인 자리인데도 불구하고 이 의원은 '공사(公私)'를 구별하지 못한 안일한 의정활동으로 구설수에 올랐다. 보스에 대한 충성도를 기준으로 했거나, 실세들의 “자기 사람 심기” 에 의해 선발된 정치신인들의 현주소를 여실히 드러내는 현 대목이다.』 는 내용의 기사 (이하 '이 사 건 제2기사' 라 한다)

(3) The articles of April 22, 2003, No. 5

제목 『정가포커스 - ○○구는 벌써 총선열기』 , 부제목 『“해볼 만하다” 너도나 도 출마의지』 , 소제목 『 시청 법원 등 밀집 부산 신 정치1번지 , 최○○ 전 의원 공백 따라 군웅할거’, 현역의원 기대이하 의정활동 비판도 한몫』 의 기사 중 『내년 총선을 1년이나 앞둔 요즘, ○○지역에서 자천타천으로 거론되는 잠재후보들이 꼽는 출마 예상지역 인기 '0순위'는 단연 ○○구다. ○○구는 ○○시청과 법원, 검찰청사 등이 밀집한 행정타운으 로서 ○○의 '신 정치 1번지’로 부상하고 있는 지역. 이같은 지역적 특성으로 인해 ○○시 노 ○○ 전 정무부시장(○○대 국회의원)과 ○○○ 행정부시장, ○○시의회 권○○ ○○○당 대 표의원( 전 ○○시의회 의장), 박○○ ○○구청장 등 정 ·관계 인사들이 주로 거론된다. 노 전 부시장의 경우 이미 ○○동에 사무실을 내고 본격적인 표밭갈이에 나서고 있다. 관심을 끄는 대목은 현역인 ㅇㅇㅇ당 권○○ 의원이 버젓이 버티고 있는데도 너나없이 해볼 만하다'며 공 공연하게 도전장을 내는 형국이 빚어지고 있다는 점이다. 지역정가에선 이에 대해 ‘초선인 권 ○○ 의원이 의정활동이나 지역발전에 대한 기여도가 기대에 못 미치는데다가 지난해 구청장 선거 공천파동에 이어 대선을 거치면서 한계가 드러났기 때문'이라는 분석을 내놓고 있다. 이 ○구의 이같은 복잡한 사정은 ○○ 민주계의 좌장이자 '○○(김○○ 전대통령)의 오른팔 역할 을 해온 최○○ 전 의원의 정계은퇴로 빚어진 지역구의 공백이 근본원인이었다. 권 의원과 박 청장, 권 전 의장은 초대 시의원 시절부터 나란히 활약해 왔으나 각기 다른 정치적 행보를 걸 으면서 이해관계도 엇갈리기 시작했다. 16대 총선을 통해 금배지를 달았던 권 의원은 지난해 구청장 선거에서 정치적 동반자였던 박 청장을 구청장 후보 공천에서 탈락시켰다. 하지만 최 전 의원의 직계로 지역정서를 꿰뚫고 있던 박 청장은 무소속으로 출마, 가뿐하게 당선됐다. 권 전 의장도 권 의원과의 불편한 관계 등으로 우여곡절을 겪다 연제구가 아닌 해운대구에서 출 마, 4선 시의원이 됐다. 권 의원은 그러나 “박 청장이나 권 전 의장은 공천문제도 있지만 선거 때마다 같은 당을 하고 있는 입장에서 도와주지도 않았고 국회의원으로 대접해 주지도 않았 다 ” 며 내년 총선을 통해 “지역구를 평정하겠다” 는 의지를 다지고 있다. 지역정가에선 세 사람 이 어차피 '돌아올 수 없는 강을 건넌 관계라고 단정하고 있다. 결국 귀착점은 내년 총선, 지 역민들의 선택에 달려 있다.』 는 내용의 기사(이하 ' 이 사건 제3기사' 라 한다)

(4) The articles of May 30, 2003, No. 5

제목 『정가포커스 ■ 닮은 '꼴' 두 구청장 행보 이목 집중』 , 부제목 『내년 총선 과 연 나올까』 , 소제목 『 무소속 후보로 각각 3선 성공, ○○ 박○○○○ 박○○씨, 현 역의원 배척 속 출마설 부분』 의 기사 중 『나란히 초대 ○○시의원을 지낸 공통점을 갖 고 있는 두 박 청장은 당시 지방선거를 앞두고 현역 지구당위원장이었던 ㅇㅇㅇ당 권○○( 이 O ) 김ㅇㅇ(OO) 의원으로부터 공천을 받지 못하자 ○○○당을 탈당 , 무소속으로 출마했다 . .....(중간생략)...... ㅇㅇㅇ당 일색인 OO에서 다른 지역은 '국회의원과 구청장은 같은 편이지 만 두 지역만은 “다른 편” 이라는 인식이 널리 퍼져 있기 때문이다. 특히 지역정가에선 '○○와 ○○구의 경우, 기존의 두 현역의원만 아니라면 정당을 가리지 않고 누가 되어도 상관없다' 는 얘기가 나오는 등 분위기가 심상찮다' 는 분석을 내놓고 있다.』 는 내용의 기사(이하 ' 이 사 건 제4기사' 라 한다)

(5) The article of April 3, 2004 No. 8

면제목 『 유권자의 힘 , 선택 2004 D-12 ◇ 본보 시민패널 후보시유 토론<ㅇㅇ 구 』 중 표 제목 『 후보자 상세정보』 의 표 중 원고의 최종 학력을 『ㅇㅇ 0000 대학교』 로, 『최근5년간 납세·체납 실적(천원)』 란 중 『체납액』 에 관해 배우자의 체납 액으로 『1,455 』 천원으로 기재한 내용의 기사(이하 ' 이 사건 제5기사' 라 한다)

2. The parties' assertion and judgment criteria

A. The parties' assertion

The plaintiff asserts that the defendant newspaper company and the defendant newspaper company, who is the media organization, and the reporters belonging thereto, published and distributed false facts about the harm to the plaintiff as articles, thereby impairing the plaintiff's reputation by allowing ○○○, Jeon○, and Park Park to keep the plaintiff's reputation as a de facto political person in bad faith to its readers and voters. Thus, the defendant newspaper company and the plaintiff asserted that the defendant newspaper company should jointly pay consolation money in accordance with defamation and the defendant newspaper company should publish a correction report, such as the contents of the claim for correction.

As to this, the Defendants asserted that among the articles of this case, Articles 3 and 4 are merely an expression of opinion without a specific statement of fact, and therefore, defamation is not established, and even if the remaining articles damage original reputation, they did not distort the Plaintiff with a false representation, but reported only true facts for the public interest for the sake of the public interest. Even if not, the Defendants asserted to the effect that there is considerable reason to believe that it is true, such as confirming the content from news source, etc.

B. Criteria for judgment

(1) Whether defamation is defamation

(A) Whether a certain article of the press constitutes a tort by impairing another person’s reputation should be determined on the basis of the overall appearance of the article, comprehensively taking into account the objective contents of the article, the ordinary meaning of the used words, the connection method of phrases, etc. under the premise that the general readers contact the article, under the premise that the article’s overall purport is related to the article’s overall purport. Moreover, the relevant article’s expression should also be considered in light of the social trend that served as the background of the article (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da37524, 37531, Jan. 22, 2002).

(B) Defamation, which is a tort under the Civil Act, refers to an act infringing upon an objective evaluation of a human character, such as a person’s character, virtue, reputation, and credit, and as long as such an objective evaluation is infringed, it may be established even through an expression of opinion or comment. However, mere expression of opinion or comment alone cannot be said to undermine the other party’s social evaluation. Thus, in the case of pure opinion or comment that is not premised on a statement of fact, liability for damages caused by defamation is not established. Meanwhile, the expression of opinion or comment is not limited to cases where a fact is directly expressed, and even based on an indirect and roundive expression, it does not refer to cases where a statement of fact is not limited to cases where a fact is directly expressed, and if it is based on an indirect or roundive expression, it indicates the existence of such fact, and thereby, it is sufficiently sufficient to the extent that it is likely to infringe on a person’s social value or assessment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Da20360, Jul. 28, 2000).

(2) Whether illegality is denied

Even in a case where an act of damaging another person’s reputation is committed under the civil law, if it is a matter of public interest and its purpose is solely for the public interest, such act is not unlawful if it is proved to be true, and if there is considerable reason to believe that the content of the report is true even if it is not proven, it shall be deemed unlawful. However, in the case of defamation through the news report by the media, whether there is considerable reason to believe that the content of the report is true shall be determined in light of the following: (a) whether the actor conducted an adequate and sufficient investigation to verify the authenticity of the report by comprehensively taking into account all the various circumstances, such as the contents of the publicly alleged fact, the evidence believed to be true, the reliability and credibility of the report, the easiness of verifying the fact, the degree of damage to the victim caused by the news, etc.; and (b) whether the truth is supported by objective and reasonable materials or grounds (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Da50213, May 10, 2002).

3. Determination as to the first engineer of this case

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff demanded the list of the residents' autonomous council members and the heads of Tong/Bans in relation to public official elections and election campaign which require the revision (in order for the head of Tong/Ban to carry out an election campaign, he shall resign 90 days prior to the election). The plaintiff's purpose is to grasp the actual state of the residents' autonomous council members retired prior to the local election, the residents' autonomous council members of Tong/Ban and the head of Tong/Ban who are reinstated after the local election, and the head of Tong/Ban. However, the defendant Do governor argued that the defendant Do governor damaged the plaintiff's reputation by reporting maliciously, which seems to use the materials of the public office for private election without reporting ○○ public officials and the plaintiff.

B. Whether defamation is defamation

The contents of the article 1 of this case are as follows: (a) the Plaintiff, as a whole, before 50 days of local elections, demanded the Si/Gun/Gu office of the Dong/Si/Gun to submit a list clearly stating the positions, names, resident registration numbers, addresses, telephone numbers, occupations, major career, etc. of the head of Dong/Si/Gun/Gu and the residents' autonomous council members to the Gu/Si/Gun office of 00 days of local elections without undergoing the official procedures of the National Assembly; and (b) the Plaintiff’s statement of such facts was given to the Plaintiff, who abused the position of the National Assembly members and intended to use materials of public offices for private election, thereby infringing upon the objective evaluation that the Plaintiff, a member of the National Assembly, received from society

C. Whether the illegality is denied

(1) Facts of recognition

The following facts can be acknowledged by considering the following facts: Gap evidence Nos. 40, 44, 46, Gap evidence No. 43-1, 2, Eul evidence No. 7 and the fact inquiry results to ○○ Metropolitan City Mayor of the court of first instance.

(A) On March 29, 2002, the Plaintiff sent a letter to ○○○○○○○○○○, who is scheduled to leave the local election on June 13, 2002, to identify and submit 16 of the heads of Tong/Kun offices, the names of residents’ autonomous council members, and the current status of government subsidies organizations, etc. on March 29, 2002, and the Plaintiff’s assistants demanded the competent authority to submit data on the details of the report and change of the property of the chairman of the ○○○○○○○○○○, who is scheduled to leave the election without the head of the Gu.

(B) Defendant ○○ who was in charge of the ○○○○-gu and the ○○-gu as an journalist belonging to the Defendant newspaper company, was informed of the above from the public officials in the region where he was in charge of ordinary political affairs around April 2002 and the persons related to political affairs, and it is thought that it is difficult to view that the active member’s demand for submission of the above materials cannot be deemed as a normal parliamentary activity. The Defendant ○○-○, who was in charge of the ○○-gu and the ○○-gu and the ○○-gu, who was in charge of the ○○-gu and the ○○-gu, and the members of the National Assembly Committee on Administrative Autonomy, and the Plaintiff’s assistant.

(다 ) 이 사건 제1기사가 보도된 날, 원고의 보좌관인 심○○는 “개인신상자료가 담긴 구체적인 자료를 보내라고 요청한 사실은 없으나, 요청한 자료 중 일부가 선거에 이용될 수 있다는 오해의 소지가 있음을 인정하고, 구청에서 제출한 자료 일체를 사과 공문과 함께 해당 구로 반송하였다” 는 취지의 보도관련 참고자료를 피고 손○○에게 보냈고, 피고 손○○은 그러한 원고측 소명서의 내용을 담은 후속 기사를 작성하였으 며, 피고 신문사는 2002. 4. 23. ㅇㅇㅇㅇ' 제35면에 이를 게재하였다.

(2) Determination

(A) Public nature

In accordance with the above facts, the first engineer of this case, as a member of the National Assembly at the time before 50 days from the election of the head of local government, requested the list, etc. of the head of Tong and the residents' autonomous council members to 16 Gu/Si/Gun offices in 00 regions, and raised a suspicion that the plaintiff can use the list unfairly, and the purpose of the first engineer of this case was for the public interest in promoting the fairness of the election.

(b)originality and reasonableness;

Of the contents of the article No. 1 of this case, it is not clear that it is difficult for a public official in charge of ○○○ City, who received data from the plaintiff about the list of the heads of Tongs and Bans, to keep materials and deliver personal information (the result of fact inquiry about the ○○○ Metropolitan City Mayor in the first instance court). However, according to the fact inquiry about the ○○○○ City Mayor, the public official in charge of receiving a request for data from the plaintiff is too excessive to keep the amount of data, and it is recognized that the public official consulted with the plaintiff's assistant officer on duties). Whether ordinary articles are true or not is true or not is a fact that is consistent with the objective fact when examining the overall purport of the contents, even if there is a little difference from the truth or somewhat exaggerated expression, the contents of the first article of this case are about 50 local elections, and in this respect, it is not clear that the head of the 16 Gu/Si/Gun office and the head of the 16 Gu/Si office, who is a member of Busan area, demanded the plaintiff to submit the list of the objective facts and the ○○○ Council.

나아가, 앞서 본 바와 같이, 피고 손○○은 현역 국회의원이 지방자치단체장 선거를 앞두고 위와 같은 자료를 요구한 것을 정상적인 의정활동으로 보기 어렵다는 생각을 가지고, 제보내용의 진위를 확인하기 위해 원고로부터 자료제출을 요구받은 ○○시청 과 일선 구청 관계자, 박○○, 국회 행정자치위원회 직원 및 원고 보좌관 등을 상대로 자료제출을 요구한 사실의 진위 및 그 경위, 용도, 그에 대한 취재원들의 의견을 취재 하는 등 가능한 범위 내에서 적절하고도 충분한 조사를 통해 합리적이고 객관적인 자 료들을 취재하여 그 취재결과를 바탕으로 이 사건 제1기사를 작성하였고, 이 사건 제1 기사를 보도한 후 원고 측도 명단 등의 자료를 요구한 것이 오해의 여지가 있음을 인 정하고 스스로 해당 구청에 자료를 반송한 점 등에 비추어 볼 때, 보도기관인 피고 손 ㅇㅇ이나 피고 신문사로서는 이 사건 제1기사가 진실이라고 믿을 만한 상당한 이유가 있었다고 할 것이다.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, since the first engineer of this case is not illegal, the plaintiff's assertion of defamation based on the illegality of the first engineer of this case is without merit.

4. Determination as to the second engineer of this case

A. Whether defamation is defamation

(1) According to the contents of the article 2 of this case, the defendant newspaper company and the defendant Jeon Soo-○ did not directly indicate the plaintiff's name in the contents of the article 2 of this case. However, considering the whole purport of the arguments in the article 3, No. 9, No. 10-1, No. 2 of this case, the defendant newspaper company's 16th National Assembly member's term of office, first half of June 13, 2001, the defendant newspaper company's 16th National Assembly member's term of office, first of the article 2 of this case's article 2 of this case's article 2 of this case's article 2 of this case's article 2 of this case's article 2 of this case's article 2 of this case's article 2 of this case's article 2 of this case's article 2 of this case's 2 of this case's 200th National Assembly member's term of office, the plaintiff's 2 of this case's first National Assembly member.

(2) In addition, among the part concerning the plaintiff of the article 2 of this case, the part concerning the plaintiff of the article 2 of this case, "this member was unaware of previous opinion due to parliamentary activities that he did not distinguish public and private areas," and the part "a member revealed that he did not make efforts to develop parliamentary activities and local areas as a member of the National Assembly for private reasons," and the part concerning the plaintiff of the article 2 of this case, "a member revealed that he did not actually reveal the present address of a member of the political person selected by "self-fagrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgs". However, this part concerning the plaintiff among the article 2 of this case, since the plaintiff's second article of this case reported that he was not responsible for the plaintiff's refusal of the special member of the National Assembly for private reasons, it is recognized that the plaintiff was subject to objective evaluation by the article 2 of this case.

B. Whether illegality is denied

(1) Facts of recognition

The following facts may be acknowledged by adding up the whole purport of the pleadings to each entry of evidence Nos. 9-1, 2, 12-5, 6, 8 through 10.

(A) Around June 2001, the Plaintiff asked whether ○○○○ was a member of the National Assembly who was a member of the National Assembly at the time of ○○○○○○○ was willing to be in charge of a member of the budget and settlement special member, on the grounds of the National Assembly’s standing committee and the inspection of the state administration, and the doctor’s degree thesis examination of ○○○○○ University.

(B) To confirm this, the reporters of the Defendant newspaper company visited the Plaintiff’s office several times at the beginning of June, 2201, but around that time, the Plaintiff did not directly talk with the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff’s assistant ○○○○○ in charge of budget and settlement of accounts cannot be assigned to the special member of the budget and settlement of accounts due to preparation for doctor’s degree thesis, and the Plaintiff’s refusal of the special member of the National Assembly’s budget and settlement of accounts on the very personal ground of the text of doctor’s degree at the ○○ University University. The Plaintiff posted it as an article on June 13, 201.

(다 ) 이러한 기사가 보도된 후 2003. 4. 15. 이 사건 제2기사가 게재되기까지 원 고 측에서 위 노ㅇㅇ의 기사에 대해 피고 신문사를 상대로 정정보도를 청구하거나 해 명서를 보낸 바는 없다.

(라 ) 한편, 피고 신문사 정치부에서는 2003년 4월 무렵 제17대 국회의원 선거를 1년 앞두고 , 국민들의 정치개혁 요구에 부응하고, ○○지역 정치권에서 1988년 이후 김 ㅇㅇ 전 대통령의 소속정당이었던 ○○당, ○○○○당, ○○○당, ○○○당에 의해 그 지역구 국회의원 전 의석이 독점되어 온 지역주의의 틀을 변화시키고자 “지역정치 틀 바꾸자”라는 제목 아래 000당 관련 기사를 2회에 걸쳐 작성하기로 하고, 다선(多選) 중진 국회의원들과 초·재선 국회의원들에 대한 여러 가지 비판여론을 전달하기 위하여 000당 제○○대 초선 국회의원들의 비판사례로서 노○○이 작성한 위 2001년도 기 사 내용을 인용하기로 하고 피고 전○○가 이 사건 제2기사를 작성하였다.

(2) Determination

(A) Public nature

According to the above facts, the article 2 of this case reforms local politics at the time of the 17th election of National Assembly members in front of 1 year, and intends to communicate critical public opinion on criticism of the National Assembly members in Busan area belonging to ○○○○○ Party, it can be deemed that the contents of the plaintiff's parliamentary activities, etc. as a member of the active duty service, which was a public figure, were for the purpose of public interest.

(b)the truth;

The article 2 emphasizes that, considering the overall context, purport of the preparation, etc. of the article 2, it is necessary to emphasize that the OO of the National Assembly, which has affected the political power of ○○ area, should be changed by putting the public opinion on criticism of the plaintiff and the first and second generations, rather than the article for the specific person. However, it is recognized that the plaintiff did not seek to assign a special member of the National Assembly budget and settlement of accounts, which appears important from the viewpoint of the ○○ area for private reasons such as preparing for doctor's degree, but it is consistent with the important part of the statement of fact [However, the article 2 should be in charge of the preliminary member, but it is difficult to conclude the article 2, which is published by the plaintiff in the article 2, and it is insufficient to recognize the authenticity of the part that the plaintiff actually posted the phrase "I are not many other persons?" but it is insufficient to recognize the authenticity of the part that the plaintiff actually made the news report in this case to attract the public interest. However, even if the plaintiff did not know the above fact or simple relation as part that the plaintiff actually made it.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, since the second engineer of this case is not illegal, the plaintiff's assertion of defamation based on the above legal nature of the second engineer of this case is without merit.

5. Determination as to the third and fourth engineers of this case

A. The plaintiff's assertion

원고는, 2002년도 구청장 선거에서 자신이 박○○를 ㅇㅇㅇ당 후보로 추천하지 않은 사실은 있으나 후보공천에서 탈락시킨 사실이 없음에도 원고가 개인적인 감정으 로 그를 공천하지 않은 것처럼 기사화하였을 뿐만 아니라, 우수한 국회의원으로 여러 번 선정된 바 있음에도 “원고의 의정활동이나 지역발전에 대한 기여도가 기대에 미치 지 못하는 데다가 2002년도 대선을 거치면서 한계를 드러냈기 때문이라는 분석을 내놓 고 있다”, “지역정가에선 원고만 아니면 정당을 가리지 않고 누가 되어도 상관없다는 얘기가 나온다" 라는 등의 간접적이고 우회적인 표현으로 허위의 사실을 적시하여 원고 의 명예를 훼손하였다고 주장한다 .

B. Determination

Of the articles 3 and 4 of this case, there is a lack of direct evidence to acknowledge that the part of the Plaintiff’s ○○○○○○○○ at the time of the election of local government in 2002 was true. However, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement in Eul evidence No. 6, in the local government election in 2002, the public authority of the head of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ was actually exercised at the time of the election of local government in 2002, and it is recognized that the Plaintiff was not recommended as a candidate for 00 days. In light of the fact that Park○○○○’s ○○○○○○○ was actually dismissed from the candidate candidate for 0000,000, and therefore, it is consistent with the truth in the important part of the statement in fact.

In addition, among the article 3 of this case, the part of the article, "It is hard to see as a statement of specific facts that may impair the plaintiff's reputation even if based on the overall context or expression of article 3 and 4 of this case itself, it is hard to see as a statement of fact that the plaintiff's parliamentary activities in the local district of the head of the Gu, following the presidential election of the head of the Gu, have been carried out an analysis that there was a limit due to the lack of the presidential election, following the presidential election of the head of the Gu, and the presidential election of the head of the Gu." and the article 4 of this case, "in the case of ○○ and ○○ region on the local election of the head of the Gu, it is hard to see as a statement of fact that there is no sufficient local parliamentary activities in the local district of the plaintiff by taking advantage of the expression of local circumstances."

In addition, in the election of the 17th National Assembly member of the National Assembly in 2004, the article 3 and 4 of this case are the fact that the OOO is the base of the locked candidate, and the relation between the plaintiff and potential candidates including the plaintiff, and only the fact that the head of YOOO, who was deprived from the Gongcheon-cheon, was elected by going to his office without charge, cannot be deemed to have infringed upon the objective evaluation that the plaintiff received from the society.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion, based on the premise that the plaintiff's reputation was damaged by the articles 3 and 4 of this case, is without merit.

6. Determination as to the fifth engineer of this case

A. The plaintiff's assertion

원고는, 이 사건 제5기사에 원고가 ○○대학교에서 학사학위, ○○대학교 ○○대 학원에서 석사, ○○ ○○사범대학교 박사학위를 취득하였음에도 학력사항으로 '○○○ ○ 사범대학'이라고만 기재하여 마치 원고가 중국에 도피유학을 하여 학부만 마친 것처 럼 보도되고, 조세체납의 경우 다른 선거구와는 달리 원고의 ○○구 선거구 및 김ㅇㅇ 의 ○○○ ○구에서만 현 체납액을 따로 밝히지 아니한 채 체납부분만 언급하여 유권 자로 하여금 마치 원고가 현재 체납하고 있는 인상을 줌으로써 원고의 명예를 훼손하 였다고 주장한다.

B. Whether defamation is defamation

(1) The academic records

As shown in the evidence No. 33, evidence No. 34-1, evidence No. 34-2, evidence No. 36-6, and evidence No. 52, unlike the phrase “(administrative doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral officer's doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral doctoral

(2) The part concerning the fact of default

갑 제25호증의 1, 2, 갑 제26호증의 1, 2, 을 제2호증의 각 기재에 의하면, 원 고의 배우자인 이○○은 납부기한이 2000. 4. 30.인 종합소득세 1,466,320원을 2000. 5. 2 . 납부한 사실이 있는데, 피고 신문사 소속 기자인 피고 박○○은 제17대 국회의원 선 거 직전인 2004. 4. 3. 중앙선거관리위원회로부터 정보를 받아 ㅇㅇ ㅇㅇ 지역구의 입 후보자들에 대한 정보를 비교하는 내용의 이 사건 제5기사를 보도하면서, 후보자 가족 전체의 “최근 5년간 납세 · 체납 실적란에 체납액 누계와 현 체납액을 구별하지 아니 하고 체납액이라고만 표시하고는 원고 가족 전체의 최근 5년간 체납액이 1,455,000원이 라고 적시한 사실이 인정되는바, 이로 인해 국회의원 선거에 출마하는 원고의 공직자 로서의 자질인 준법성, 성실성, 도덕성에 대하여 원고가 사회로부터 받는 객관적인 평 가가 침해되었다 할 것이다.

B. Whether illegality is denied

(1) Public nature

피고 신문사와 그 소속 기자인 피고 박○○이 제17대 국회의원 선거에서 ㅇㅇ ○○ 지역구에 입후보한 후보자들과 그 가족들의 체납사실을 보도한 것은 공공의 이해 에 관한 사항으로서, 특별한 사정이 없는 한, 그 목적이 공공의 이익을 위한 것이었다. 고 볼 수 있다.

비록, 갑 제27, 28호증의 각 1, 2, 갑 제34호증의 2, 갑 제36호증의 1 내지 14의 각 기재에 의하면, 피고 신문사에서 원고가 입후보한 부산 ○○구를 제외한 다른 부산 지역구의 입후보자들에 대한 정보를 비교하는 기사에는 체납내역란에서 체납액 누계와 현 체납액을 구별하여 기재한 사실을 인정할 수 있어, 원고의 지역구에 대하여만 현 체납액을 생략한 것이 다소 부당해 보이기는 하나, 본래 국회의원 선거라고 하는 것은 지역구 내의 후보자들간 경쟁인 이상 원고가 출마하는 지역구의 모든 후보들에 대하여 동일하게 현 체납액을 생략하였다면 그다지 불공정한 것으로 보이지 아니하고(앞서 든 증거에 의하면, 이 사건 제5기사에서는 원고와 같은 지역구에 입후보한 송○○도 2004. 4. 3. 당시 체납액이 없음에도 5년간 체납액 2,176,000원으로 게재되었고, 또 피고 신문 사는 원고의 요구에 따라 ㅇㅇㅇㅇ' 2004. 4. 10.자 제6면에 「정정과 반론 」 이라는 제 목으로 원고의 법학박사 학위와 현재 세금 체납액이 없다는 내용의 기사를 게재한 사 실이 인정된다), 원고가 주장하는 사유만으로 공공성이 부인되지는 아니한다고 할 것이

(ii)the truth;

Since the plaintiff's spouse's delinquency of KRW 1,455,00 within 5 years prior to 2004 is recognized, the article 5 of this case shall be considered as a whole to accord with the truth.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, among the article 5 of this case, the part of the report of the plaintiff's academic background cannot be deemed to have undermined the plaintiff's reputation, and since the part of the report of the plaintiff's amount in arrears is not unlawful, the plaintiff's assertion based on the illegality of article 5 of this case is without merit.

7. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed in its entirety.

United Kingdom of Great Britain

Kim Maritime Shelf

A correction report, ○○○○○○, on June 13, 2001, has distributed articles to the effect that ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ on April 15, 203, and a large title on April 15, 203.

Attached 2 Corrections

정정보도문, ○○○○는 2003. 4. 22.자 5면의 대제목 「“해볼 만하다” 너도나도 출마의 지 」 , 중간제목 「...... 현역의원 기대이하 의정활동 비판도 한몫」 기사 및 2003. 5. 30.자 5면의 대제목 내년 총선 과연 나올까」 , 중간제목 「..... 현역의원 배척 속 출마설 분 분 」 기사에서 총선이 1년이나 앞둔 시점에 ㅇㅇ구가 잠재후보들의 출마예상지역 인기 0 순위인 점과 관련하여 관심을 끄는 대목은 현역의원인 원고가 버티고 있는데도 너나 없이 공공연하게 도전장을 내고 있다는 점인데, 지역정가에선 이에 대해 '초선인 원고 의 의정활동이나 지역발전에 대한 기여도가 기대에 못 미치는데다가 지난해 구청장 선 거 공천파동에 이어 대선을 거치면서 한계가 드러났기 때문'이라는 분석을 내놓고 있 으며, 지난해 구청장 선거에서 원고가 박○○ 구청장을 구청장 후보공천에서 탈락시켰 으나 그가 무소속으로 출마, 당선됐다는 취지의 기사를 배포한 적 있습니다. 그러나 위 지역정가의 분석내용과 구청장 후보공천 탈락시킨 사실은 허위로 밝혀졌습니다. 이로 말미암아 위 신문을 제작·발행하는 주식회사 ○○○○사는 법원에서 위와 같은 허위의 사실을 적시한 기사를 신문에 게재하여 전 국회의원 권○○의 명예를 훼손하였다는 내 용의 패소판결을 선고받았으므로, 위 판결에 따른 의무이행으로 이 정정보도문을 게재 합니다. 끝 .

Attached 3 Corrections

On April 3, 200, the correction report, 000, under the title of the "candidate Detailed Information Act", which is the title of 8th of April 2004, the former National Assembly member's right to obtain a doctorate was omitted. In other electoral districts, although the sum of delinquent taxes on the candidate's failure to pay taxes and the present amount in arrears were reported together, in the case of ○○○, even though his spouse had failed to pay taxes prior to the towing, but in the case of other electoral districts, there was only a report of delinquent taxes despite the absence of delinquent taxes at the time of the report, and in other electoral districts, there was a book of distribution of articles such as stating debts in the case of ○○, even without reporting the portion of delinquent taxes. However, it was revealed that the omission of doctoral degree acquisition and reporting at the time of reporting, and reporting only the portion of delinquent taxes to the Plaintiff, which was made and published by the above newspaper, it was found that ○○ incorporated company had damaged its reputation’s duty to publish the above facts in the newspaper.

Attached 4 Correction Report

On April 22, 2002, ○○○○○○ demanded to submit a new list on the title of 35 pages of 35 pages of the Act on the Requests for Personal Information for Election, the title of the intermediate title, the request for the phone number of the ○○○○○○, the head of the Tong/Dong, etc., and the title of the small title 40,00 square meters. In the article, “(i) the Plaintiff sent an official letter to ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○).