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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

The Plaintiff served as the representative of C Association, an animal protection organization, from August 31, 2002 to July 2013.

On April 19, 2013, at around 11:19, the Defendant posted a letter stating “D” in the name of “E” on the bulletin board, a website. The Defendant posted a letter stating “D” on the bulletin board, stating that the Plaintiff’s face, posted as “E”, includes the Plaintiff’s photograph.

On June 2013, the Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Defendant on the ground that he posted the instant notice on a bulletin board that enables an unspecified number of people to confirm the content of the text, but the Jinju District Prosecutors' Office at the Changwon District Prosecutors' Office was recognized as a criminal fact by the Defendant, but the Defendant is the first offender, the minor under the age of 19, and the degree is not severe compared to other comments listed on the relevant bulletin board, and the Plaintiff already deleted the relevant comments, and made a decision not to institute a disposition of suspension of indictment.

[Grounds for recognition] According to the facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 5, and 9's statements, and the purport of the entire argument as to the grounds for a claim as a whole, the defendant used a language that may undermine the plaintiff's social reputation on the bulletin board of the Internet daily newspaper storage site where many unspecified persons can access and confirm the contents of the writing, thereby insulting the plaintiff. Since it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiff suffered mental suffering, the defendant is obliged to pay the plaintiff the above damages with money.

Furthermore, it is reasonable to determine the amount of consolation money as KRW 300,000 in consideration of the various circumstances shown in the argument of this case, such as the content and purpose of the article posted by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's obligation to pay consolation money of KRW 300,000 to the plaintiff and its existence and scope from April 19, 2013, which is an illegal act.