[손해배상(기)][공1999.8.15.(88),1611]
Whether the honor of the plaintiff's clan may be damaged if the number of the members of the plaintiff's clan is lowered to lower the number of the members of the plaintiff's clan and if the plaintiff's clan registered as the descendants of the members of the defendant's clan, and the world map ( world chart) with such contents is published and distributed as the name of the member of the defendant's clan, it may be deemed that the honor of the plaintiff's clan was damaged (negative)
Since defamation refers to an act that merely infringes upon a subjective reputation, which means an act that reduces the number of the members of the plaintiff's clan and registers them as descendants of the defendant's clan by lowering the number of the members of the plaintiff's clan and issues and distributes the world of the members of the plaintiff's clan, it cannot be deemed that the existence of the plaintiff's clan is denied, or that the social evaluation is lowered because the plaintiff's foundation of existence is denied, or that the remaining members of the plaintiff's clan who do not have blood relation are subject to criticism that they gather for their own ancestor, and therefore, it cannot be said that the reputation of the plaintiff's clan was damaged, apart from being infringed upon.
Articles 750, 751, and 764 of the Civil Act
Supreme Court Decision 89Meu12775 Decided February 27, 1990 (Gong1990, 760) Supreme Court Decision 92Da756 Decided October 27, 1992 (Gong1992, 3252) Supreme Court Decision 97Ma634 Decided July 9, 197 (Gong1997Ha, 2599)
Plaintiff clan (Attorney Kim Young-chul et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)
Defendant 1 and two clans (Law Offices of Light-Ba, Attorneys Park Jong-ju, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)
Gwangju High Court Decision 98Na1224 delivered on August 14, 1998
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
The grounds of appeal are examined (However, the supplemental appellate brief received after the lapse of the period is considered to the extent of supplement in case of the attorney Park Jong-man and the plaintiff.)
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that defamation refers to an act that merely infringes upon the subjective reputation, and that the social reputation of the plaintiff's clan is not undermined because it can not be deemed that the social reputation of the plaintiff's clan has been undermined because the number of the plaintiff's clan members was reduced and the number of the plaintiff's clan members was registered as the descendants of the plaintiff's clans 1, 2 and the defendant's clans 2 and the defendant's three clans issued and distributed the world of the above contents, even if the plaintiff's three clans were found to be fundamentally denied the clan, and therefore the plaintiff's existence foundation as a clan has not been denied or it cannot be deemed to have been affected because the plaintiff's clans were criticized as a clan's member's reputation has not been infringed. In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just and there is no violation of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles as to non-existence of Article 764 of the Civil Act, etc.
The ground of appeal is without merit.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Lee Jae-soo (Presiding Justice)