손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasons for the recognition of the judgment of the first instance court are as follows: (a) each of the 4th, 18th, 6th, 20th, and 8th and 5th of the judgment of the first instance are as follows: (b) each of the 4th, 6th, and 8th and each of the 5th of the 8th, “a text message,” and the reasons for the
Provided, That with respect to the plaintiff's repeated argument, the following judgments shall be added.
2. Additional determination
A. As to the assertion regarding interference with business and defamation by spreading false information, the Plaintiff asserts that the act of sending text messages to E employees, etc. on the use of past food materials due to the time limit for overtime work by considering the size of small city C in which the instant restaurant is located, the current status of Korean community formed therein, and the limited scope of major customers of the instant restaurant, etc., the Defendant’s act of demanding the Plaintiff to pay overtime work allowance, etc., but refusing such demand by the Plaintiff constitutes a tort with obvious intention to intimidation, interfere with business, or defamation regardless of the authenticity of the content thereof. (2) However, even if considering the evidence as seen earlier, it is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the content of the instant text messages still sent by the Defendant is false, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
However, even in cases where a person’s reputation is harmed by criminal or civil facts, if it is true and solely for the public interest, the act is not unlawful. Here, “the time when the alleged facts relate to the public interest” refers to the public interest when objectively viewed, and an actor also indicates the facts for the public interest. In such a case, whether the alleged facts relate to the public interest or not shall be determined by considering all the circumstances regarding the expression itself, such as the specific contents of the alleged facts, the scope of the counter-party against which the publication of the facts was made, and the method of expression.