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

A. The Plaintiff, a corporation for the purpose of construction business, etc., was constructing a house for electric power supply in Ansan-si, a member D. However, on March 3, 2017, Defendant B concluded a contract with the Plaintiff at KRW 153,642,760 for the new construction work of electric power supply housing in Ansan-si, a member E (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. Defendant B obtained approval for the use of the instant building around December 5, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 19, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the construction of the building of this case, the Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff’s representative and his spouse were accused of criminal charges against the investigation agency by means of fraud and fabrication of private documents, etc., thereby spreading false facts.

Since then, on October 30, 2018, the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office rendered a disposition that the above complaint was not suspected.

Although it was revealed that Defendant C did not have any assertion of the complainant in the above criminal complaint case, Defendant C spread false information by raising an article that slanders the Plaintiff to the organization G jointly owned by all the occupants of the house in Ansan-si from November 6, 2018 to September of the same month.

The Defendants alleged false facts as above, thereby impairing the Plaintiff’s reputation through the supervisory authority’s filing of a civil petition or criminal complaint, and by spreading false facts such as false construction to the organization G of the occupants, and thereby damaging the Plaintiff’s credit, are liable to compensate for emotional distress.

3. Even if the complainant was subject to an investigation due to the suspected fact that the complainant filed a complaint and received a disposition of non-guilty suspicion, the complainant’s act cannot be readily concluded as tort unless it is based on intention or gross negligence to the extent that the complaint is deemed abuse of right.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da46360, Apr. 12, 2007). So, the Defendants filed a complaint against the Plaintiff, even if so, from the investigative agency.