B. The respondent Dong-won Co., Ltd.:

(1) Attached Form 1-2(a) on the 4th page of the East Asia, which is issued within seven (7) days from the day following the day on which the judgment was served, and title 1-2(a) on the 4th page of the East Asia, with a scale equivalent to the active person of class 30 of the High Dictic body, the main text is the same as the active person of class 30 of the East Asia, and the name name name of the counter-arguing person

(2) Attached Form 1-2(b) on Attached Form 220 to the first 220 pages of the New East Asia, the editing of which is not completed from the day following the receipt of the judgment, and title 1-2(b) on which the editing is not completed for the first time; title 30 to the top 30 to the top stit stit stit stit 30 to the top stit stit stit stit stits

C. The respondent cultural daily report, Inc., was issued within seven days from the day following the day on which this judgment was served, the counterargument Nos. 1-3, which was published within 7 days from the day following the day on which the counterargument was served, the title is the active size of the class 30 luct body, the main text is the same size as the active range of the above cultural daily report, the name of the claimant for the counterargument report is the class 16 luct body.

D. The Respondent Shipbuilding Co., Ltd.

(1) Attached Form 1-4(a) on the 4th page of the Choteil Report issued within seven (7) days from the day following the day on which the judgment was served; title 1-4(a) on the 4th page of the Choteil Report; class 30 is the stitant size of the 30th class of the citic body; the main text is the same size as the active person of the above Joseon Report; the name name of the request for counter-party

(2) Attached 1-4(b) No. 1-4(b) in annexed Form 30(b) in annexed Form 1-4(b) in annexed Form 1-4(c) in which the editing is not completed for the first time from the day following the day on which the judgment was served; title 30 is a large-scale activation size; main text is the same as active person of the main text of the above daytime; and the name name name of the claimant for counter-performance is the large-

E. The applicant Central Daily Report Co., Ltd. shall make a counterargument report as shown in Appendix 1-5 on the No. 4 of the Central Daily Report published within seven days from the day following the date of receipt of this judgment; title 30 shall be the studio size in the High Dictic body; the main text shall be the same size as the active person in the above Central Daily Report; the name name name of the request for a counterargument report shall be the 16th active size in the High Dictic body;

F. The respondent, the Respondent Co., Ltd., was issued within seven (7) days from the day following the date of receipt of this judgment, the counterargument Nos. 1-6 in the Form 4 of the Korean Report No. 1-6, the title is the class 30 lux size in the class 30 lux body in the class 30 lux body, the same size as the active person of the above Korean Report No. 1, and the name name of the request for counter-

G. The respondent's independent newspaper company, the respondent, from the date following the receipt of this judgment, shall make the counterargument report listed in Appendix 1-7 on the first page 26 of the Ethical Report, the title shall be the 30th active size of the ancient body, the main text shall be the same size as the active person of the above implication, and the name name of the respondent shall be the 16th active size of the ancient body;

H. A monthly shipbuilding Co., Ltd., the respondent, from the day following the receipt of this judgment, shall publish the counterargument report as shown in Appendix 1-8 on the face of the first 168 of the Monthly Navigation which was issued for the first time after the editing was not completed, the title is the class 30 active size of the class 30, the main text is the same size as the active person of the main text of the monthly steering line, and the name portion of the claim for objection shall be the class 16 active size of the class 16.

2. A. In the event that the respondent's tendency newspaper company fails to perform the duty of paragraph 1(a)(a), the above respondent shall:

B. In the event that the respondent, Dong Jae-in, Inc. fails to perform its obligations under paragraph 1(b), the above respondent shall:

C. In the event that the Respondent Culture Daily Co., Ltd. fails to perform its obligations under paragraph 1(c), the above Respondent:

D. In the event that the respondent corporation, the Respondent, et al. did not perform the duty of Paragraph 1 D., the above Respondent,

E. Where the respondent Central Assistant Co., Ltd. fails to perform its obligations under paragraph 1(e), the above respondent shall:

F. If the respondent, Korea Min Il-soo, Inc., fails to perform its obligations under paragraph 1f., the above respondent:

G. In the event that an independent newspaper company, the respondent, does not perform its obligations under Section 1(g), the above respondent shall:

H. In the event that a monthly assistant corporation, the respondent, did not perform its obligations under paragraph 1(h), the above respondent shall:

It shall pay to the applicant an amount of three million won each day from the day after the expiration of each of the above periods until the completion of performance.

3. The remaining claims against the respondent are dismissed, respectively.

4. Of the costs of lawsuit, each of the parts arising between the claimant and the respondent's tendency newspaper company, the respondent and the respondent's winterer company, the Central Daily Assistant Co., Ltd., the Claimant and the respondent, the Korea Daily Assistant Co., Ltd., the Claimant and the respondent, and the Respondent Co., Ltd., the Claimant and the respondent shall be borne by the Claimant, the remainder by the Claimant and the Respondent respectively, and each of the parts arising between the Claimant and the Respondent's cultural journal, the Respondent Co., Ltd., the Respondent and the Respondent, the Respondent and the Respondent shall be borne by each of the above Respondent

2. The respondent Seoul Eastern Co., Ltd.:

A. The title of the counterargument No. 2-2 counterarguments shall be indicated in the upper part of the first page of the East Asia’s Report, which was first published after the pronouncement of the instant case, in which the editing was not completed, on the top part of the first page of the East Asia’s Report, as the main body, as the main body, as the main body, and as the main body, as the main body, and as the part of the claim for

B. Attached Form 2-2(b) on the face 220 of the Newdong Asia Act, which was first published after the pronouncement of the instant case, is not completed. The title of the counterargument report shall be as class 50 of the ancient body, the main part shall be as class 8 of the main part, and the part of the claim for counterargument report shall be published in a class 30 of the ancient body with class 30 of the

3. The respondent's cultural daily report, a corporation, should publish attached Form 2-3 counterarguments in the upper part of the first page of the cultural daily report, which was first published after the pronouncement of this case, in which the editing was not completed after the pronouncement of this case, in the upper part of the cultural daily report, the title of the counterarguments No. 2-3 counterarguments at class 50, the main part, the main part, and the part of the claim for counter-

4. The Respondent Shipbuilding Co., Ltd.

A. Attached Form 2-4(a) is attached to the upper part of the first section of the Protocol of Shipbuilding, which was first published after the pronouncement of the instant case, in which editing has not been completed. The title of the counterargument report is as follows: the main part is as follows; the main part is as follows; the main part; the main part of the main part; and the part of the applicant for the counterargument report is published in a stalth 30 stalth d

B. Attached Form 2-4(b) on the 30th page of the daytime Line, which was first published after the pronouncement of the instant case, where the editing has not been completed. The title of the counterargument shall be indicated in the title as the 50th class active of the ancient body, the main text of the part, and the part of the claim for counterargument news shall be indicated in the 30th class active of the ancient body.

5. The Central Daily Report Co., Ltd., Ltd., the respondent, on the upper part of the first page of the Central Daily Report, where editing has not been completed after the judgment of this case, shall be published in the upper part of the Central Daily Report No. 2-5, on the top of the first page of the Central Daily Report No. 1, in which the editing has not been completed, on the top of the first page of the Central Daily Report No. 50, the main part

6. The respondent, Korea Daily Report Co., Ltd. shall publish attached Form 2-6 counterarguments in the upper part of the first page of the Korea Daily Report, which was first published after the pronouncement of the instant case, in which the editing was not completed, in the upper part of the first page of the Korea Daily Report, the title of the counterarguments No. 2-6, 50, the main text, the main text, and the part of the claim for counter-litigations in the upper part

7. The independent newspaper company of the respondent shall publish attached Form 2-7 counterarguments No. 2-7 counterarguments on the face of the 26th of the City History International Act, which was first published after the pronouncement of the instant case, in the form of the title 50, the main part, the main part, and the main part, the main part, and the part of the request for counter-performances, in the form of 30th of the ancient body.

8. A monthly shipbuilding Co., Ltd., the respondent, on the page 168 of the monthly shipbuilding which was first published after the pronouncement of the instant case, the title of the counterargument No. 2-8 counterarguments No. 2-8 shall be 50, the main text, the main text and the main text, and the part of the claim for objection shall be expressed horizontally in class 30, a class stitor of the ancient body.

9. If paragraph 1, the respondent's tendency newspaper company, paragraph 2, paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 5, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 7, and Paragraph 8 are not met by the respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent's Respondent

In a case of a request for a counterargument report, the meaning of a report that seeks a counterargument report shall be determined by taking into account the objective contents of the relevant report, the ordinary meaning of words used in such report, the context before and after the content of the report, etc., and how it is recognizable to the general public with a sound common sense. Thus, even if the contents of the report take the form of a newspaper such as any suspicion or rumor, as long as it is publicly announced through a newspaper, it should be deemed that the relevant newspaper made a factual assertion. Therefore, such contents of the report shall be deemed a subject of a request for a counterargument report. Further, even if the report was made by citing the investigation results of an investigation agency such as the prosecution, etc., or the contents of a statement made by a third party, it shall also be deemed a subject of a request for a counterargument report as a factual assertion. The purport of the request for a counterargument report is not to determine the truth of the contents of the report, but to give a related person an opportunity for a counterargument report as to the contents of the report. Therefore, even if the contents of the report in itself are formally deemed true, it cannot be deemed as an additional or rejected to seek a counterargument.

2. Occurrence of a claim for objection;

(a) Basic facts;

(1) The part of the respondent's application against the respondent's tendency newspaper company

According to the records, the respondent's inquiry company's tendency reported to the effect that the applicant's non-party's non-party's defense force exists during the daily newspaper from September 15, 2001 to the 29th of the same month, and expressed the applicant's "a company from organized violence", "a company from organized violence double level (PJ)", "a company from organized violence double grade (PJ)", "a company from organized violence double grade", "a company from organized violence double grade", "a company from the Financial Supervisory Service", "a applicant has maintained a large amount of communication with his/her own and related personnel", "a person who maintains a large amount of communication with his/her passport customs," or "a person who maintains a large amount of communication with his/her own passport," or "a person who provides the applicant with an electronic statement from the non-party's prosecutor's office with the non-party 1 and the non-party 200 million won or 200 million won for his/her own prosecution funds."

In addition to the applicant, the above respondent met with respect to the applicant, and when the applicant is detained in 192, the member of the Hancheon-gu Council, the members of the Handae-gu, and the members of the Kimok-gu, the members of the current passport and the members of the previous Hong-gu, all of the members of the prosecution at the time of the detention. At the time of the detention, the current prosecutor's office exercised pressure on the investigation by defending the applicant. When the prosecutor conducts the investigation into the non-party, he exercised the pressure to the investigation team through Kim Tae-Un, and reported that the non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non

(2) The part of the application filed against the respondent Dong Jae-won, Inc.

(A) Part on the content of the daily report of the East Asia

기록에 의하면, 피신청인 주식회사 동아일보사는 2001. 9. 14.부터 같은 해 10. 5.까지 사이에 자신이 발행하는 일간「동아일보」에 이른바 ‘ 소외인 게이트 사건’에 관한 신청인의 로비의혹을 보도하면서 신청인을 ‘조폭 출신 사업가’, ‘조직폭력배 두목 출신의 기업가’ ‘국제피제이파 두목 출신’, ‘1992년 광주지역 최대 폭력조직인 국제피제이파를 이끌었다’고 소개한 사실, 신청인이 정관계 인사들과 친분이 두텁다거나 오랫동안 정치권과 인간관계를 쌓아오면서 여권 유력인사들과 친분이 있다는 설이 있다거나 검찰 · 정치권에 ‘마당발’ 인맥을 구축하였다는 취지의 보도를 한 사실, 신청인이 광주상고를 졸업하였다고 보도한 사실, 신청인이 2000. 5월경 소외인이 수사를 받게 되자 ‘이회장을 돕겠다’고 직접 나섰다고 보도하였고, 또한 소외인이 약속어음 40억 원을 로비자금 명목으로 신청인에게 전달했으며, 신청인이 광주와 제주 등지에서 약속어음을 현금으로 인출해간 사실이 확인되었다고 보도한 사실, 한편 위 피신청인은 검찰의 공소사실을 인용하면서 신청인이 소외인이 횡령혐으로 긴급체포되자 진정인과의 합의가 필요하다며 거액의 돈을 받아 상당부분을 가로챘고, 그 후 추가합의가 필요하다고 속여 다시 돈을 뜯어내기도 했다고 하면서 ‘주가조작 사기꾼’을 사대로 사기행각을 벌였다는 것이라고 보도하면서 또한 삼애인더스의 해외전환사채 발행 주간사회사의 알선명목으로 10억 4천만 원을 받았다고 보도한 사실이 소명된다.

In addition to the applicant, the applicant asserts that the above respondent met with respect to the applicant, and when the applicant is detained in 192, H's members or members of the Korea-U.S. KALUUGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG.

(B) Part on the content of the Report of the New Franchisia

According to the records, the above respondent published an article of "mean and power" in November 2001 of the New Year's 2001, which he issued, and the applicant has been related to international dispatch, and the applicant posted the article of "mean and power" on the ground that he was the head of the household, or the person who gets in office or exercises influence after him, or manages his organization on the ground that he was not on the surface. When the applicant was detained in 1992, the applicant made a statement of his red shot at the time of detention, and 3 and 4 persons from the country of Gwangju, including the head of the Dong-gu Office of Public Prosecutor's Office visiting the President at the time of detention to the effect that "at the time of detention, there are several persons who defend the applicant within the prosecutor's office."

(3) Part of the Respondent's cultural report

According to the records, the respondent's cultural bulletin, from September 17, 2001 to October 12 of the same year, was placed at the time of the Non-Party 1's request for a large amount of money issued by the applicant to the effect that the applicant was detained by the 4th anniversary of the Non-Party 1's request for a public prosecutor's office, and the applicant was detained by the 5th anniversary of the fact that the applicant was called the Non-Party 1's request for a large amount of money issued by the 4th public prosecutor's office, and that the applicant was also detained by the 9th anniversary of the fact that the applicant was called the Non-Party 1's request for a large amount of money issued by the Non-Party 4th public prosecutor's office, and that the applicant was still detained by the 9th public prosecutor's office, including the Non-Party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's news report, and that the applicant was still detained by the 9th public prosecutor's office's office.

In addition to the applicant, the applicant asserts that the above respondent was involved in the Non-party's acquisition of insolvent enterprises or the price manipulation. However, even after examining the record, it is difficult to recognize that the above respondent reported the above factual assertion, and therefore, the claim on this part is not accepted.

(4) The portion of the application filed by the respondent against the Chosun Shipbuilding, Inc.

(A) Part on the contents of the daily report of the "Mediation Report"

According to the records, during the period from September 17, 2001 to October 7, 201 of the same year, the Respondent Co., Ltd. reported that the applicant was detained by the prosecutor's office in 1992 while introducing the applicant's suspicion that he was habitually detained by the Nonparty 1's sexual traffic during the period from September 17, 2001 to the Nonparty 1's sexual traffic report on the so-called "non-party's sexual traffic" was issued by him, and that the applicant was also detained by the prosecutor's office in 1992. The applicant did not inquire the Non-party 1's sexual traffic report of the Non-party 1's sexual traffic report and the Non-party 1's sexual traffic report, and that the applicant was found to have maintained a broad relationship with the actual personnel of the government office at the time of the investigation of the non-party 1's sexual traffic report and that the applicant was also subject to the investigation of the non-party 2's sexual traffic report.

In addition to the applicant, the applicant asserts that the above respondent met with the applicant, who was a member of the Hancheon-gu, a member of the Labor Relations Commission, and a member of the Kim Jong-gu, and that the prosecution exercised pressure to the investigation team through Kim Tae-Un's attorney when investigating the non-party, but it is difficult to recognize that the above respondent reported the above factual assertion, even after examining the record, it is difficult to accept the argument on this part.

(B) Part on the Report of the Daytime Navigation Report

According to the records, the above respondent reported on September 27, 2001 as to the so-called “non-party Lypt case,” which he issued on September 27, 2001, and reported to the effect that the applicant was sentenced to punishment after being indicted for two items at the time of 1992 and being detained for suspicion of a criminal organization, etc., and that the prosecutor used the horses of the members of the Red Sheet, and the prosecutor’s office exercised the pressure while citing the horses of the members of the Red Sheet, the applicant was detained for the fact that the applicant received 2 billion won from the non-party as the price of the case.

In addition to the applicant, the above respondent met with respect to the applicant, and when the applicant is detained in 192, the current member of the Korea-style Family Council or the member of the Korea-style Family Council or the member of the Korea-style Family Council before the Korea-style Family Council has been dismissed. At the time of the above detention, the current member of the prosecutor's office exercised pressure to conduct an investigation by defending the applicant, the applicant was Kim Hong-il, and the prosecutor exercised pressure to the investigation team through the Kim Jong-Un Attorney when investigating the non-party. When the prosecutor investigates the non-party, he exercised the pressure to the investigation team through the Kim Jong-Un, and received the funds for the issuance of overseas telephone bonds, and participated in the Non-party's acquisition of insolvent companies or the stock price manipulation. However, there is no vindication in the record of the above assertion.

(5) The part of the Respondent's petition against Central Assistant Corporation

기록에 의하면, 피신청인 주식회사 중앙일보사는 2001. 9. 17.부터 같은 해 10. 5.까지 사이에 자신이 발행하는 일간「중앙일보」에 이른바 ‘ 소외인 게이트 사건’에 관한 신청인의 로비의혹을 보도하면서 신청인을 국제피제이파의 배후라고 하면서 1992년 폭력조직 국제피제이파 두목으로 구속기소되었다는 내용을 보도한 사실, 신청인이 소외인과 K상고 동창이라고 보도한 사실, 소외인에 대한 수사와 관련하여 검찰관계자들을 상대로 신청인이 직접 구명로비를 하거나 정치권을 동원했을 가능성이 제기되고 있다고 보도한 사실, 신청인이 1992년 구속되었을 때 국회의원은 물론 검 · 경 고위간부까지 전방위 로비를 벌였다고 보도한 사실, 홍준표 전 의원의 말을 인용하여 한화갑의원이 신청인의 위 구속당시 면회를 하였다고 보도한 사실, 소외인에게 사건무마 명목으로 40억 원의 약속어음을 받았으며 300억 원대의 해외전화사채발행을 위한 로비자금조로 10억 4천만 원을 받은 것으로 드러났다고 보도한 사실, 검찰이 로비자금으로 받은 돈 중 17억 원은 신청인이 소외인을 속여 가로챘다고 밝혔다고 보도한 사실이 소명된다.

In addition to the applicant, the applicant asserts that the above respondent met with respect to the applicant, who was a member of the Labor Relations Commission, Kim Jong-ok et al., and the prosecutor exercised pressure to the investigation team through Kim Tae-Un's attorney at the time of investigating the non-party, and that the non-party was involved in the Non-party's acquisition of defective companies or the price manipulation. However, even after examining the record, it is difficult to recognize that the above respondent reported the above factual assertion, and therefore, the above respondent's assertion on this part is rejected.

(6) The part of the Respondent's motion against the Korean Assistant Corporation

According to the records, during the period from September 15, 2001 to October 12 of the same year, the respondent reported the suspicion of the applicant as to the so-called “non-party Lypt case” to the "Korea Daily Mypt case" issued by him, and reported that the applicant was detained due to the suspicion of the number of violent organizations by introducing the applicant as “non-party 2 executives of the International Sypt 2,” and “the non-party 4,000 won from the organized violence crime.” In the Gwangju area, the applicant provided entertainment and money to political parties, prosecutor’s department, and UV personnel, and the non-party 1,400 million won from the non-party 4,000 won from the non-party 1,000 won from the Defendant’s representative at the time of detention in 192, and the applicant was also reported as the non-party 1,000 won from the non-party 1,000 won from the non-party 1,000 won.

In addition to the applicant, the above respondent met with respect to the applicant, and when the applicant is detained in 192, the prosecution room exercised pressure on the investigation by defending the applicant, and the prosecutor exercised pressure on the investigation through Kim Tae-Un Attorney at the time of investigating the non-party, and made a report to the effect that the non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party's share price manipulation

(7) The Respondent's independent newspaper company

According to the records, the above respondent, who started on October 4, 2001 and published articles of "Nexching with inspection and drinking" in "Mexching with 00 million won" issued by her Respondent, reported that the applicant had been able to get off from Gwangju, Gwangju, about 1986 as "Mexching with international violence" and "Mexching with 00 million Won," and that one of the applicants who had been able to get off from the public prosecutor's office and staff members of Gwangju, was the applicant's representative organization violence, and that some of the applicants and some of the applicants were able to get out of Gwangju, for a long time among the applicants who had been 1 billion Korean public prosecutor's office and staff members of Gwangju, and that the applicant was able to get out of Gwangju, Daegu, about August 2001, the applicant was also able to get out of Gwangju, Daegu, the public prosecutor's office's last place of work and the public prosecutor's office's office's office's last place of work.

In addition to the applicant, the applicant asserts that the above respondent met with respect to the applicant, and the KCAB member, the KCAB member, the KCAB member before the KCAB member, and the prosecutor made a report to the effect that the above respondent exercised pressure to the investigation team through Kim Tae-Un Attorney at the time of investigating the non-party, but it is difficult to recognize that the above respondent reported the above factual assertion even after examining the record, it is difficult to accept the argument on this part.

(8) The part of the Respondent's application against a monthly assistant company

According to the records, the respondent monthly shipping company, as the title "the history and guidance of the Republic of Korea" in November 2001, which was issued by him, expressed the applicant as "the applicant from the Republic of Korea of the broad international radiation," and reported that the applicant has maintained a broad and broad relationship with the actual personnel of the political party as well as the prosecutor, police, and the National Tax Service from the trend, and the political party, and for a long time, such as the applicant's prosecutor, the police, the National Tax Service, etc., from the prosecution, the police, and the National Tax Service. When the applicant is detained in 192, the president of the Cho Hong-si Tourism Corporation was arrested by the senior executive of the prosecutor's office, and the prosecutor's executive was able to defend the applicant while defending the applicant. According to the prosecutor's report, the applicant was subject to an investigation by the non-party 400 billion won as the remuneration for the investigation by the non-party 40 billion won.

In addition, with respect to the above respondent, the applicant met with the Korea-U.S. Council member, the Korea-U.S. Council member, and the Kimok-du Council member, etc., and when the applicant is detained in 192, the current applicant has been dismissed, and the current prosecutorial department at the time of detention exercised pressure on the investigation by defending the applicant, and the prosecutor reported that the current prosecutorial department at the time of detention exercised pressure to the investigation team through changes in Kim Tae-Un, and that the prosecutor exercised pressure to the investigation team when investigating the non-party. However, even after examining the record, there is no vindication that the above respondent reported the above factual assertion.

B. Determination

According to each of the above facts supporting each of the above facts, all of the above reports shall be deemed factual arguments, and since such publication causes damage to personal legal interests, the applicant shall be deemed to have the right to request the respondent to publish a counterargument report.

3. Details and methods of the counterargument report;

A. In light of the contents of the article at issue in this case, the reason why the article at issue was published, the degree of damage suffered by the applicant, the factual statements that the applicant intends to see, and the scope of the explanation necessary to clarify it, etc., the contents of the counterargument report shall be determined in the same manner as those of each counterargument report mentioned in attached Forms 1-1 through 1-8 within the scope of each counterargument report as stated in attached Forms 2-1 through 2-8, which is sought by the applicant. The method of publishing the counterargument report shall be determined in light of the location of the article at issue, active size, etc.

However, according to the records, regarding the fact that among the contents of the counterargument report sought by the applicant, the applicant was acquitted on the part that the applicant was found innocent on the part that the applicant was not guilty on the part that the international objection system or organized a criminal organization, the respondent corporation Dong Il Il-sung, the central bulletin company of the company, the monthly bulletin company of the company, the monthly bulletin company of the company of the company of the company of the Respondent, the fact that the Respondent had already reported the interview at the time of detention of the applicant in 192, and the fact that the H member who was the current passport room at the time of detention of the applicant in 192 had already reported the Respondent, the monthly bulletin company of the company of the Respondent, the Korean company of the company of the Respondent, and the part that the Claimant had already reported on the part that the

Even if the respondent was rendered not guilty verdict as to the fact that the applicant was an organization of a criminal organization, the respondent was convicted of having committed an act of violence by participating in the organization of violence. The purport that the applicant is related to the organization of violence falls under the truth and thus the applicant has no legitimate interest to seek it against the truth. However, the content of the counterargument report to the effect that the applicant has no legitimate interest in seeking it against the truth. However, the content of the counterargument report submitted in the above argument or the record alone is that the applicant seeks to make a counterargument at the present time, namely, the applicant was not the second part of the international divers, and it is difficult to recognize that the applicant was not the second part of the international divers, and that it is not an organization of violence. Therefore, the above argument is not accepted.

In addition, the respondent's tendency newspaper company and the Chosun Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. asserted that there is no legitimate interest in claiming a counterargument report as to whether an applicant is a non-party or a senior high school or not. However, considering that the main contents of the article of this case are that the applicant was engaged in a non-party's work as a guardian or a settlement agent of the non-party, it is difficult to view the contents of the above counterargument report as to the relation between the applicant and the non-party as a standing closed-off. Therefore, this part of the assertion is without merit.

B. Meanwhile, to the extent that it is deemed reasonable to enforce the performance of the obligation under Paragraph 1 of this Article, the respondent is ordered to issue an indirect compulsory performance order, such as Paragraph 2 of this Article.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the application of this case against the respondent is justified within the scope of each recognition, and the remainder of the application is dismissed as it is without merit.

[Attachment]

Judges Lee Jin-gu (Presiding Judge)