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

A. Since L (the father of the Plaintiff) was detained on the ground that he stolen 67 million won of health insurance benefit, he was released and asked the Plaintiff to sell medical devices, such as X-ra-ra photographing equipment, installed in the operating room of the N Hospital located in Busan Ma (hereinafter “instant hospital”), which was operated by L (hereinafter “the instant hospital”). On January 27, 2012, L (the father of the Plaintiff) removed each of the above medical devices from the operating room.

B. O (the representative of the instant hospital) filed a complaint against the Plaintiff on the charge of building intrusion and theft, and the investigation of the said suspected charge was conducted at the police station under the jurisdiction of the police station. On December 13, 2012, the lower court rendered a non-prosecution disposition on the charge of having been acquitted (Evidence of Evidence).

C. On July 13, 2012, the public relations office of the Busan Regional Police Agency distributed news report data in attached Form 1 to visitors in relation to the above case.

The reporters belonging to the Defendants prepared an article of the same content as the attached Table 2 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant article”) on the basis of the foregoing news report, and published it on the newspaper or website.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 (including paper numbers), and the fact-finding with the Commissioner of the Busan Local Police Agency of this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff invadedd the hospital of this case and stolen the medical device owned by the hospital of this case in order to raise the plaintiff's father's deposit money through the article of this case without undergoing proper verification procedures, and that the plaintiff's honor was severely damaged by reporting as if the warrant of detention was claimed due to such criminal facts. Thus, the defendants are obliged to pay consolation money to the plaintiff as compensation for damages caused by the above illegal acts.

3. Determination

A. Whether defamation is established or not is caused by a victim’s specific defamation.