A. (1) After this judgment becomes final and conclusive, Defendant 1’s incorporated association shall publish a correction report in the column 50 of “the monthly ○○○ Period” (attached Form 1) issued for the first time by the first time, in the form of a photopict of the same size as that of the article’s title (hereinafter “emergency diagnosis”) written in [Attachment 4], and the main text in the form of the article’s size and active per se as stated in [Attachment 4].

(2) If Defendant 1’s incorporated association fails to comply with Paragraph (1) within the period under Paragraph (1) above, the above Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiffs the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 1,00,000 per month from the day following the expiration date of the above period until the completion date of the performance.

B. The Defendants shall pay each of the Plaintiffs KRW 5,000,000 to each of the Plaintiffs.

2. The plaintiffs' remaining main claims against defendant 1 incorporated association and the remaining claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

3. Of the total litigation costs, the part arising between the Plaintiffs and Defendant 1’s incorporated association is 60%, and the remainder is borne by the same Defendant. The part arising between the Plaintiffs and Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 is 80%, and the remainder is borne by the same Defendants, respectively.

4. The above paragraph 1-2 (b) may be provisionally executed.

The following facts are either disputed between the parties or acknowledged by considering the whole purport of the pleadings in each of the statements in Gap evidence 1-1-2, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 2, and 3.

A. Status of the parties

(1) As the representative director of the non-party 1 corporation, the plaintiff 1 is the chief director of the Maam Cultural Foundation (Gyeongam 1; hereinafter "Maam cam cam cam cam cam cam cam cam cam cam cam cam cam cams) established on January 20, 204, and the plaintiff 2 is the director of the Maam cam cam c

(2) Defendant 1’s incorporated association is a nonprofit incorporated association established with the permission of the head of cultural division on January 7, 1993 with the aim of contributing to promoting culture and arts of the community and promoting sound citizen culture. Defendant 2 is the publisher and editor of “○○○” era, and Defendant 3 is the reporter of “○○○○” era.

B. Donation to Plaintiff 1’s Busan University

On October 8, 2003, Plaintiff 1 agreed to donate KRW 30.5 billion to Busan University, and donated the total of KRW 10 billion on December 14, 2003, KRW 5 billion on December 31, 2005, KRW 5 billion on May 30, 2005, KRW 4 billion on August 23, 2006, to Busan University.

C. Publication of the article of this case

In May 2008 (No. 283), the article of the following summary prepared by Defendant 3 was posted (total news article No. 4) in pages 50 through 55 under the title of “emergency diagnosis”, “Abregrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgs,” “Abregrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgs,” “Abrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgs,” and “Abrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrg

[Attachment 1] Articles 1 (No. 53]

The university position on the process of preparing and delivering the amendment of the agreement on donations on the side of the school is as follows: “ despite the fact that the agreement on donations is prepared and delivered by the donator to the organization to which the donation is to be made, the donor has already been duly prepared in October 2003 and the content of the agreement equivalent to the agreement on the side of the school has already passed three years since the donation was duly prepared in October 2003, and there was no excessive demand on the side of the school of Plaintiff 2, who borrowed the donation. As such, it was demanded that the school make and prepare the donation by changing the purpose of the donation on the side of the school as of the date of the initial agreement for the continuous exercise of influence.”

[Attachment 2] Articles 2 (No. 54]

In the university, there was a lot of cases of unfair demand by donors and defamation by universities.

First of all, it is required to register part of the Yangsan Campus site (5,000 square) as the site for Yangsan Educational Group due to the unfair demand for the Yangsan Camp site. It is required to continue to be requested even though it has been expressed that it is legally inappropriate.

In addition, it has undermined the reputation of university by making various university unsatisfys and unsatisfys for university authorities. Also, it has been predicted that the actual involvement in the presidential election was made in the president election.

In addition, it was also demanded to change the location of the establishment of the Gyeongdong, and there was an attempt to intervene in other university administration. In the first page of the 60th of the 60th of the year, it was required to place donated facts, pictures, etc., and the request to include the donator in the award of the 's Busan Metropolitan Government,' and the request to attend and speak at the board of directors of the Development Fund Foundation.

[Attachment 3] Articles 3 (No. 54]

The side of the Busan National University established a cambly cambly on the left side of the present main office with respect to the plaintiff 1 president who made a deep contribution that will be the camb in our society. After the completion of the Yangsan Campus, it is called a plan to transfer the noble intent of donors to the Yangsan Campus in order to commemorate the noble intent of donors. In addition, in addition, support for the camball Foundation, the attendance and honorable treatment of representatives of various individual events, and the publicity of donors at the time of the official and non-official and non-official events inside and outside the school, and the publicity of the donor to the university. In addition, the name of the cambalgynasium was adopted in order to honor the athletes who made a contribution that will be the camb in our society.

이에 대해 어느 대학 졸업자는 “부산대는 국립대학교다. 학교를 방문했을 때 본관 옆에 세워진 동상을 보고 깜짝 놀랐다. 아직 부산대 출신, 아니면 설립에 관계된 누구도 그런 예우를 받지 못했다. 오히려 학교 측에서 너무 엄청난 대우를 해 준 것 아닌가 생각한다”고 말하기까지 했다.

It is a case where it is not possible to find the cases of being attached to the sports center built on the largest scale and the Dong branch of the National University through through the national university.In the EL branch, a large enterprise, made a donation for the development of the Busan metropolitan city, made a visual tower on the side of the ancient library while holding the International Center, and attached the name of the Center to the "Senam" only.

The reason why the Busan National University calls for the purport that it will be a commemorative letter on the Dong was because the culture of donation by the president of Plaintiff 1 had a great significance. The contents of the commemorative questions that were inscribed next to the Dong will be omitted (hereinafter referred to as the “influence”).

Articles 4 (End of 55 pages) of this case

In order to prevent the original sublime of the donor, whether the university or not the donor or the university or not, the pure intent of the first instance will be re-established so that the culture of donation in this society does not decline.

Plaintiff 1’s words at the interview at the time of donation do not seem to have flance of the property dealt with in the society. The life of the human being would be good for a beautiful life that shows his body from his life. The university’s side is not useful for an individual, and it was returned to the future, but it is more visible for both campaigns to return the virtue of “conciliation” as the price for both campaigns.

2. Summary of the plaintiffs' assertion

The plaintiffs did not have any undue or excessive demand on the side of the Busan National University, such as demanding the registration of part of the site for Yangsan Campus (5,000 square) as the site for the Busan National University, due to unfair demand for the land for Yangsan Campus. ② there was no involvement in the remarks from the university and the authorities of the university or from the president of the Busan National University; ③ there was no involvement in the election of the president of the Busan National University; ③ there was a demand for the change of the location of the establishment or the posting of facts and photographs, etc. on the first page of the "Masan National University 60 years," ③ there was no involvement in the administration of the university, such as requesting for the attendance and right to speak at the board of directors of the Busan National University Development Foundation.

Therefore, the article of this case is false, and since the plaintiffs suffered damage therefrom, they have filed a claim for a corrective report and a preliminary counterargument report around Defendant 1’s incorporated association as an appropriate measure to restore their reputation. In addition, the plaintiffs suffered mental suffering due to such false article, and thus, they seek compensation against the defendants.

3. Determination on the primary claim against Defendant 1 incorporated association

(a) Facts of recognition;

The following facts are acknowledged in light of the above evidence evidence Nos. 3, 4, 5, 4, 5, 6, 7-1 through 9, 13, 14, 9-1 through 8, 10-1, 2, and 3, part of the evidence Nos. 10-1, 2, and 3, and part of the testimony of non-party 2 of the witness of the first instance trial and the purpose of the personal examination of the defendant Nos. 3 of the first instance trial (excluding each part not trusted later), and it is not believed that part of the evidence Nos. 4, and part of the testimony of non-party 2 of the witness of the first instance trial, and part of the personal examination result of the defendant No. 3 of the first instance trial as to the defendant No. 3 of the first instance trial.

(1) Officers and employees at the time of establishment of Defendant 1’s incorporated association

On January 7, 1993, which was established by Defendant 1’s incorporated association, Nonparty 3 and vice-chairpersons, who are professors of the Busan University Environment Graduate School, were elected respectively by Nonparty 4, who are professors of the Busan University’s social department. Nonparty 5, the president of Busan University, and Nonparty 6, who are professors of the branch of the branch of the Busan University, were elected respectively (record 51 pages) (Records 51 pages). Meanwhile, Defendant 3 served as the master of the “○○○” period from June 2005 to June 2005.

(2) The terms and conditions of the donation agreement and dispute between the Plaintiff 1 and others

(A) On June 27, 2002, Nonparty 7, who was the president of the Busan National University, concluded a development project for the 2 campus of Busan National University (hereinafter “2 campus”) with the Korea Land Corporation, purchased some of 838,560 square meters of land in the 2 campus area within 38 billion won in the housing site development project district, and paid 3,804,966,00 won in the 3,804,966,00 won in the 27th June 27, 2002, 3,425,094,00 won in the first intermediate payment, 2.5 billion won in the remaining 2.7 billion won in the Busan National Land Corporation (hereinafter “the 275 billion won in each part of the intermediate payment, 2,4400,000 won in each of the 2.75 billion won in Busan National Land Corporation and 3.74 billion won in each of the remaining 2.7.4 billion won in each of the 27.26.27.27.27.27.27.

(B) On June 12, 2003, Nonparty 8 was elected as the president of the Busan National University and was appointed on September 1, 2003 (from March 10, 2006, a director of the Busan National University is in office) and Nonparty 7 tried to secure the balance of the site price of the 2 campus before retirement, and on June 17, 2003, Nonparty 1 sent a letter to Plaintiff 1 on June 17, 2003, stating that “I would like to conclude the 2 campus out of one day he was the president of the Busan National University as the president of the Busan National University until the date it is secured the balance of the site price of the 2 campus.”

(C) After taking office as the president, Nonparty 8 requested Nonparty 9, who worked as the head of the administrative office of the school foundation ○○○ Private Teaching Institutes established by Plaintiff 1 as the head of the administrative office of the school foundation ○○○ Private Teaching Institutes established by Plaintiff 1, to the effect that Plaintiff 2 was met at a lot hotel around September 2003, and subsequently requested the Plaintiffs to “Dodra for the development of the Busan National University”, the Plaintiffs decided to contribute KRW 30.5 billion to the Busan National University around this time.

(D) (1) On October 8, 2003, when the Plaintiffs transferred the above decision to Nonparty 8, Nonparty 8 and Nonparty 8 entered into a donation agreement with the Plaintiffs to contribute KRW 30.5 billion to Busan National University as “the Busan National University Camp Construction and Research Support Fund,” and among which, up to October 14, 2003, KRW 10 billion was up to October 14, 2003; and the remainder KRW 20.5 billion was up to six equal installments from 2004 to 2009 (hereinafter “instant donation agreement”). (No. 97 pages of evidence 7).

2) Defendant 1, an incorporated association, who was prior to the conclusion of the donation agreement of this case, shall publish the Plaintiff 1’s photograph on the cover of December 2003 (No. 230) and on the cover of No. 14-19, the article describing the act of donation of this case, referring to Plaintiff 1’s above act of donation (No. 1,2, and No. 185 of the record No. 10).

(E) Under the instant donation agreement, the Plaintiffs contributed a total of KRW 19.5 billion to Busan National University on four occasions, as seen earlier. From June 12, 2004 to February 28, 2007, the Busan National University changed the payment of KRW 6.85 billion from the above donations to the expenses for the establishment of sexual intercourses; KRW 9.5 billion from the expenses for the establishment of the first professor's Research Complex; KRW 3.3379 billion from the expenses for the creation of academic research projects; KRW 1.379 billion from the expenses for the development of the BK21 project; KRW 850 million from the expenses for the construction of high-tech science and technology research; KRW 2.0 million from the date of the first sale agreement to the date of the second sale agreement to the date of the second sale agreement to the date of the second sale agreement to the date of the second sale agreement to the date of the second sale agreement to the date of the second sale agreement to the date of the second sale agreement to the date of the second sale agreement to the second sale.

(f) The plaintiffs have been subject to the approval of the board of directors of the Gamamamam University every year in making contributions under the instant donation agreement. On March 25, 2005, the board of directors held on the board of directors held on March 25, 2005 approved the bill of donation of KRW 5 billion to the effect that "the board of directors held on March 25, 2005 approved the bill of donation of KRW 23 billion to the effect that "the payment of site price shall be postponed," and "the board of directors tried to use the bill of donation of KRW 23 billion in the construction of a sports center" as it stated in the instant donation agreement that "the purpose of use of the donation of KRW 4 billion is stated as research expenses, but no other director has complied with it even around that time," and "the board of directors of the Kamamamamamamam University approved the bill of this case to the effect that "the plaintiff 2 made a contribution of KRW 300 billion in Busan National University by making a contribution of KRW 2000 billion."

(g) From February 26, 2007, Plaintiff 2 sent several letters to Nonparty 8 to the effect that “I may be exempted from the site price for the 2 campus” without any specific grounds, “I may use the donations of this case for any other purpose than the site price for the 2 campus.” Thus, I clarify what purpose of the donations of this case has been used for any other purpose and, if used for any other purpose, request I to restore it to its original state and use it as the site price.” (No. 7 evidence No. 1, No. 7 No. 93, No. 93, No. 107). Nonparty 8 accepted the request of the Plaintiffs and completed a letter of agreement on donation stating “Yaususususususususus (No. 2 campus) purchase fund” (However, the date of preparation was Oct. 8, 2003 and recorded retroactively to the Plaintiffs (No. 98).

(h) Meanwhile, on May 18, 2007, the Busan National University Development Fund (established at around 1992; hereinafter “Development Fund”) board of directors, a foundation managing the instant donation, decided that “The Plaintiff’s donation is the site price for the second campus, and it is deemed inappropriate for the Fund to use it for other purposes,” expressed a deep sense of attention, and made efforts to cover the donations used until September 30, 2007 to the maximum extent possible, and that the donation of this case is to be paid to the Korea Land Corporation as the site price for the second campus from September 2007 to the end of 2009 (record 100 pages).”

(i) On June 12, 2007, Nonparty 8: (i) revised the terms and conditions of the second sale contract with the Korea Land Corporation on September 21, 2007 to September 27, 2007; (ii) paid nine times from September 27, 2007 to December 27, 2009; (iii) paid the remainder to KRW 3,425,094,00 (Records 1444); (iv) paid KRW 2,000 among the total amount of KRW 2,00,000,000,000 KRW 2,000,000,000 won for KRW 2,000,000,000 won for KRW 2,000,000,0000 for KRW 2,074,000,000 for research and development expenses on October 24, 2007; and (iv) paid KRW 2,7197,700,07.27.27.27.

(j) On July 3, 2008, the Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation that the Plaintiff did not have the obligation to contribute the donation amounting to KRW 11 billion (= KRW 30.5 billion - KRW 19.5 billion) on the ground that the Plaintiff did not use the donation amount of this case for the first purpose of use as the site for the second campus, or that the professor of Busan University did not commit a criminal act by damaging the honor of the Plaintiffs, and filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation that the Plaintiff did not have the obligation to contribute the donation amounting to the Busan District Court Decision 2008Gahap12371 (the first time was designated as Busan University, and the subsequent change was made) on May 7, 2009. The Plaintiffs’ appeal is currently pending in the lawsuit with the Busan High Court Decision 2009Na7601 as of May 7, 2009.

(3) The particulars of coverage and preparation of the article of this case

(A) On March 207, 2007, Nonparty 2, who is a professor of the repair statistics department of Busan University and a standing director of the Development Fund board of directors, made a draft of “the summary of donations related to Plaintiff 1’s president,” prepared to hear opinions from the Plaintiffs or to report to Nonparty 8, who was the president of the Busan University without submitting materials, and individually arranged the draft of “the summary of donations related to Plaintiff 1’s president,” which was organized based on his experience, and had Nonparty 10, the head of the Busan University, the head of the publicity team, organized it (Records 206 page). Nonparty 2 did not have objective materials on “the case of unjust demand by donor and the case of damage to university honor” (Records 207 page).

(B) Around April 2008, Defendant 3 found the Busan University and demanded data related to the donation of this case to Nonparty 2 and Nonparty 10. Accordingly, Nonparty 2 and Nonparty 10 appear to refer to Defendant 3’s mail (No. 7 evidence No. 1 through 9, 13, and 14) that the Plaintiffs sent to the Busan University. However, as seen below, Defendant 3’s commencement date of the article of this case was around 25th of the same month, and Defendant 3’s publication date was possible to receive additional 10 evidence No. 7-10 on May 1 of the same year, but it was not clear that Nonparty 2 and Nonparty 10 did not have any other material from Nonparty 3’s testimony from Nonparty 2 and Nonparty 3 on the ground that Nonparty 1 and Nonparty 12 had no other material from Nonparty 2’s testimony from Nonparty 7’s presentation of evidence No. 7-11 and Nonparty 2’s presentation of evidence No. 3 of this case.

(C) Defendant 3’s letter received from Nonparty 2 and Nonparty 10, mainly from Nonparty 2 and Nonparty 10, that “ despite the fact that the donation of this case has been designated as the site price for the second campus, it has been immediately used for the original purpose.” In particular, Nonparty 8, who returned to the Busan University President candidate on April 5, 2007, made it difficult for Defendant 3 to make the Plaintiffs to vote with the president in black propaganda with respect to the donation of this case. It differs from this intention. On the reply of the first day of the same month, Plaintiff 2, “I will implement the donation without the mold as a honorable letter” (record 118 pages), and Plaintiff 2, on the second day of the same month, argued that there is no special relation with the election of the president (the president).

(D) From Nonparty 2 and Nonparty 10, Defendant 3 did not attempt to communicate or contact with the plaintiffs on the ground that it is not easy to communicate with the plaintiffs, and Defendant 3 also prepared the article of this case on the ground of the contents of the press report of this case and the main text of this case, etc. on April 25, 2008 (the Defendant’s preparatory document of this case No. 82,234 pages) on September 23, 2008, on the ground that it appears that it is necessary for Nonparty 2 to output the article of this case, and Defendant 3 appears to have prepared the article of this case on the ground that there is sufficient submission of the plaintiffs’ opinions on the main text and correspondence of this case by Nonparty 2, etc. on the ground that it appears that it is necessary for Defendant 1 to send the article of this case to the 70,000,000,0000 won, 70,0000,000 won, 70,000,000.

(E) The overall content of the first and second engineers of this case is almost the same as that of this case, except in the form of citing the horses of the Busan University related persons.

(4) Honorable treatment of the plaintiffs and the plaintiffs' requirements, etc. at Busan University

(A) Upon the conclusion of the instant donation agreement, on October 8, 2003, Plaintiff 1, the president of Busan National University, issued to Plaintiff 1 a letter of honorable treatment that “The cambagy Center and (Plaintiff 2) Arts Center at the present cambags campus to the present cambags, establish cambags (Yags) to the 2 campus, develop it into the cambags, create and build the cambags and the cambags (However, the creation and establishment of the cambags and the cambags). The cambags and the cambags are the cambags and the cambags are the cambags (2007 when the cambags and the cambags are the cambags).”

2) On November 14, 2003, the Busan National University conferred a doctor’s degree in honorary business administration (record 188 pages) and on October 15, 2003, the following conclusion of the donation agreement of this case, the Plaintiff 1 and the Busan National University agreed to use the development fund of his own donation in the construction of the crypian National University (Records 188 pages), and submitted to the Busan National University a letter of agreement on the construction plan (No. 99 pages) among the contributions of Plaintiff 1 and the Busan National University on October 15, 2003 (the matters pertaining to administrative procedures, such as authorization, permission, acquisition, etc. of the building, the design, supervision, and construction contractor of the building, and the completion of the building in the name of the Busan National University, the Plaintiff 1 agreed to recommend the construction of the crypian National University and the crypian General Construction Corporation as the construction design and construction construction of the crypian National University to the Busan National University.

(B) On July 31, 2006, Busan National University sent to the plaintiffs a letter to the effect that "(A) of the plaintiff 1's Dong in the 2 campus in relation to the building building of the plaintiff 1's Dong in the 2 campus as soon as the Kambacian's completion of the construction in the 2 campus, the plaintiff 1's Dong will be transferred (paragraph (2)) and the 2 campus to establish a landscape zone after donation upon the completion of the construction in the 2 campus (paragraph (9))" (A evidence 3, No. 215 pages). Among them, it was first performed by the Busan National University (No. 2 campususus in the 2 campus in the state of completing the construction in the 2 campus, it seems that the plaintiff 1's Dongdong was temporarily installed in the 2 campus and then decided to move it to the 2 campus in the future). However, it was not originally required by the plaintiffs to give honorable treatment to the witness of the plaintiff 18.

2) However, the plaintiffs did not request the change of the construction location (No. 2 campus) already determined in relation to the building of plaintiff 1's building of the Dong, and the plaintiff 2 presented to Busan National University the opinion that "I will front of the Dong-dong campus" at the time of November 2004 and presented to the Busan National University that "I will front of the Dong-dong campus" was admitted and the building of plaintiff 1 was established at the present location (Records 208 pages), and there was no demand that the plaintiffs register part of the site of the 2 campus in the name of the Dongam Foundation (the witness of the first instance court was testified to the purport that the plaintiff 2 made such a demand on June 2006, but there was no objective material related thereto and there was no subsequent consultation with the Busan National University).

(C) The Plaintiffs also used the expressions such as “one national university of the Republic of Korea”, “the level of the Busan National University Hospital is not only Seoul,” and “the level differs.” In particular, on April 12, 2007, the Plaintiffs also used the said letter of answer (record 119 pages) that Plaintiff 2 sent to Nonparty 8 on April 12, 2007, “I emphasize that I will be abused for the election of the president of the university of the Republic of Korea to the extent that I would be misused for the election of the president of the university of the Republic of Korea.”

2) In addition, during the period from the beginning of June 12, 2007 to the 111th of the same month, the president of Busan University, Nonparty 11 and Nonparty 12, etc., by using school communication network, alleged that they were based on the content of correspondence with the Plaintiffs. The content is that “At present Nonparty 8’s president is erroneous in connection with the donation of this case (record 203 pages),” and it is practically impossible to connect the Plaintiffs to school communication network because only internal personnel is limited.

(D) Nonparty 2 asked Plaintiff 1, who had shown the 60-year History of Busan National University, published by the Busan National University, to “I have no photograph of our country.” However, Nonparty 2 asked Nonparty 1 to “I have no news article,” and provided explanation that Nonparty 2 provided that “I have the content of donation by the National Library of Busan National University.” However, there is no fact that the Plaintiffs requested to place the facts of donation on the first day of Busan National University 60-year History (record 209 page).

(E) In around 2006, Plaintiff 2 told Nonparty 2 of the Busan National University that “Isn't have to get us from “Isn's Busan National University?” but the “Isk's Busan National University?” was given only to the graduates of the Busan National University, and Plaintiff 2 did not graduate from the Busan National University.

2) Around March 2007, Plaintiff 2 requested Nonparty 2 to “to attend the board of directors to change the purpose of the donation of this case from the “Yansan University Camp Construction and Research Support Fund” to the “Yansan University Camp (No. 2 campus) Land Purchase Fund” and Nonparty 2 refused to attend the board of directors to the effect that “development fund is due (which appears to refer to the board of directors held for the purpose of hearing the donor’s opinions)” and Nonparty 2 refused to attend the meeting of the board of directors, stating that “I will not speak when I will be given an opportunity.” At that time, Plaintiff 1, who was next to the meeting of the board of directors, attended the meeting of the board of directors to give us an opportunity to talk, and Nonparty 2 did not participate in the meeting of the board of directors (other than Nonparty 2’s “No. 20,” and the “No. 20,” “No. 50,” and the “No. 10,000,” the Plaintiffs were 200.

B. Determination

Defamation refers to an act infringing upon an objective evaluation of a person’s value as a human being, such as character, virtue, reputation, and reputation. Inasmuch as such an objective evaluation is infringed, an expression of opinion or comment may also be established by an expression of opinion. However, if an expression of opinion or comment is pure opinion or comment that is not premised on a statement of fact, liability for damages arising from defamation may not be established. On the other hand, the expression of fact is not necessarily limited to cases where a fact is directly expressed, and even if it is based on indirect and roundive expression, it is sufficient to view the existence of such fact in light of the overall purport of the expression, and thus, if it is possible to infringe on a specific person’s social value or reputation (see Supreme Court Decisions 200Da10208, Jan. 19, 201; 2000Da16360, Jul. 28, 200). 19, the Supreme Court’s determination of whether an expression of opinion or comment is a specific person’s ordinary news article as well as an article’s’s expression.

In light of the above legal principles, the article of this case expressed the article of this case in the form of news articles, which is not a conclusive expression by citing a speech or report of a third party, such as teachers and staff of Busan University, but rather a decent expression by citing the news or news report of the third party. However, in light of the overall purport of the expression, there was a statement of fact. In light of the overall context of the article of this case and the circumstances before the report of this case, etc., the article of this case presented that the plaintiffs made unfair demand to the Busan University, damaged the reputation of university, actually interfered with the presidential election, and participated in other university administration, etc., the article of this case increased the plaintiffs as responsible for the suspension of the donation of this case's donation of this case's donation of this case's donation of this case's donation of this case's news, which affected the plaintiffs' social evaluation.

Therefore, in order to determine whether there is a need for a corrective report separately from the damages claimed by the plaintiffs, I first examine whether the article of this case is false or not.

(1) Whether the article of this case is true

(A) Part of the request for registration of the name of the Gyeongamba Foundation for part of the 2 campus site

As seen earlier, the Busan National University did not have to register part of the above site under the name of the Foundation on October 8, 2003, but on the other hand, the Plaintiff 1, who agreed to donate 30.5 billion won to Busan National University, agreed to give the highest treatment to the Plaintiff 1. Furthermore, even if the Plaintiffs demanded Busan National University to take measures to use part of the above site, it does not seem to exceed a reasonable extent that the Plaintiffs would have been able to demand the donator as a donator, and it is not easy to think if the general public is in light of the purpose or method of ordinary donation, and the right to transfer the ownership in the name of the 2 camp site of Busan National University, which is originally registered in the name of the State, is not a way to demand the Plaintiff to deliver part of the above land to the 20th National University's Foundation's name as a part of the request for the above plaintiffs' use of the above land (the above plaintiffs' request to transfer the ownership to the 215th National Foundation's name).

(B) The part demanding the change of the location of the construction in the cambling.

Although the fact that the Busan National University delivered to the plaintiff 1 was trying to build a camb in the 2 campus as seen above, the plaintiffs and the Busan National University agreed to temporarily build a cambs around the main campus of the cambs in the cambs before completion of the 2 campus, and as such, in the process of temporarily selecting a location to build a cambscambs, the plaintiffs accepted it by the Busan National University, which is a location to build the cambscambs in the present cambscambs, and there was no other fact that the plaintiffs requested to change the location of the cambscambs in the present cambscambs to another location than the 2 campus in which the cambscambs were originally established. Thus, the part of the "request to change the location of the cambscambs" in the article

(C) The part concerning defamation of Busan National University

As seen earlier, inasmuch as Plaintiff 2, etc. appeared to be evaluated at a lower level of Busan University, etc., and used the expression “one election for the president of the University” in the response letter sent to Nonparty 8 on April 12, 2007, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff 2, etc. used the expression “one election for the president of the University,” which appears to be the Busan University or its faculty members, and therefore, it cannot be readily concluded that the portion of the instant article “non-standing of various universities and the non-standing statement to the university authorities” is false.

(D) The involvement of the President of Busan University in the election

The summary of this part of the argument by Defendant 1, an incorporated association, or Busan University is that, in light of the content and form (which appears to refer to the form of quotation of letter received by Nonparty 8 president in connection with the donation of this case) written by Nonparty 11, and Nonparty 12 professors, etc. on the internal communication network, the plaintiffs are presumed to have participated in the election of the president of Busan University. However, as seen earlier, there is no authority for the plaintiffs to access to the internal communication network and there is no evidence that Nonparty 11 et al. did not give the above instructions (in the course of the president election, there is sufficient possibility that the plaintiffs were discussed for the purpose of avoiding Nonparty 8). Rather, although Nonparty 8 cooperates with the president, it is impossible for the plaintiffs to use the donation of this case for the president election, and the plaintiffs are virtually not related to the president election, and the portion of the plaintiff's reply to the purport that "the plaintiff's new election of this case" in light of the following purport:

(e) The first page of the Busan National University of Law No. 60, the part demanding the publication of the donation and the publication of the photograph.

As seen earlier, Nonparty 2: (a) asked Nonparty 2 to refer the said book to Plaintiff 1, and whether Plaintiff 1 was an article related to us; and (b) provided an explanation to Nonparty 2 that “it is in the middle,” and there was only the fact that the Plaintiffs requested to publish the fact of donation and the photograph on the first page of the said book; and (c) there was no fact that the Plaintiffs demanded to publish the facts of donation and the photograph on the first page of Busan National University’s 60-year History” among the instant article.

(f) Demand to include a donor in the award of a “spacif Busan.”

As seen earlier, only the graduates of the Busan University can be awarded the award. As long as the Plaintiff 2 seems to have resisted that the Plaintiff 1, not the graduates of the Busan University, did not want to receive the said award, the part of the instant article’s “request to include the donator in the award of the “PPS Busan National University” cannot be concluded to be false, and there is no other evidence to deem otherwise.

(G) Part demanding the attendance and speech of the board of directors of the Development Fund

Unless there are special circumstances, a person who can attend and speak at the board of directors of the Development Fund shall be deemed to be a director. As seen earlier, Plaintiff 2 also sought to attend and speak at the board of directors, and Plaintiff 1 also demanded Nonparty 2 to attend and speak at the board of directors of the Development Fund, and eventually, the board of directors of the Development Fund did not conclude that the part of the article of this case “the request to attend and speak at the board of directors of the Development Fund Foundation” is false, and there is no other evidence to see otherwise (the term “the site of entry and speaking at the board of directors” as stated in the main text of this case is missing from the article of this case).

(2) Defendant 1’s duty of corrective reporting

As seen earlier, among the article of this case, the article of this case "request for ownership transfer registration in the name of the Masan Camp site (5,000 square meters)", "request for ownership transfer registration in the name of the Masan Foundation", "request for actual intervention in the establishment location of the Masan National University", and "request for the placement of the facts of donation and photographs, etc. on the first page of 60 years Busan National University" are false and it is apparent that the article of this case causes damage to the reputation of the plaintiffs. And the article of this case was made by the intention and negligence of defendant 2 and defendant 3, who are employees of defendant 1 corporation, and it is also recognized as unlawful as seen below. Even if the counterargument report was made after the decision of the first court of first instance as seen later by defendant 1 incorporated association, it is sufficient to restore the reputation of the plaintiffs. Thus, defendant 1's incorporated association is obligated to make a false report in accordance with Article 764 of the Civil Act, separate from the counterargument report and compensation for damages.

(3) Contents and methods of corrective reports;

Furthermore, with respect to the contents, size, method of reporting, etc. of a correction report, the relevant part of the request for a correction report (attached Form 2), which the plaintiffs sought, shall be revised and published as stated in attached Form 1, and the amount of indirect compulsory performance, etc. of the correction report shall be determined as stated in the order, in consideration of the size, method of publication, and other various circumstances.

4. Claims for damages against the Defendants

A. Formation of defamation

As seen earlier, the instant article affected the Plaintiffs’ social evaluation by publicly alleging the facts, and thus constitutes defamation.

B. Judgment on the defendants' defense of illegality rejection

(1) The argument

Of the instant reports, the contents related to the Plaintiffs are solely for the public interest and their purpose is for the public interest, and even if the contents are consistent with the truth or are not true, there are reasonable grounds to believe that the Defendants’ act as the Defendants is true. Accordingly, the Defendants’ act is not unlawful.

(2) Determination

Even in a case where the media has committed an act of impairing an individual’s reputation by pointing out facts, if it is solely for the public interest, it shall be deemed unlawful in the event that the alleged fact is true or there is no proof that it is true or there is any reasonable ground to believe it. However, the burden of proving such act is limited to the media that has engaged in defamation (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Da29379, Dec. 27, 2007, etc.). If only the materials provided by one of the interested parties are trusted and the materials provided by one of the interested parties and the statement of facts likely to undermine other people’s social reputation without any investigation or confirmation of facts, it cannot be deemed that there is a considerable reason to believe that the content was true (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da53214, Apr. 24, 2008).

First of all, in light of the above legal principles, the article of this case was related to the public interest and its purpose is for the public interest, and as seen earlier, it is difficult to view that there is public interest in view of the fact that Plaintiff 1, who contributed a large amount of KRW 30.5 billion to Busan University, discontinued the contribution of KRW 11 billion for the reason that the donation was used differently from the original designated purpose, and that there was a concentrated interest among the persons related to Busan University as well as the persons related to Busan University, and the people, including Busan National University

However, among the article of this case, the part of the "Yansan Camp (5,000 square) site" is that "request for the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Masan Foundation", "request for the change of the establishment location in the Masan National University", "actual interference in the election of the president of the Busan National University", and "request for the placement of facts, photographs, etc. to be donated to the first page of the 60th National University of Busan National University" is as seen earlier, and it is difficult to recognize that the defendants had a considerable reason to believe that the above facts were true. Thus, the defendants' assertion on this part is without merit without any further review.

Next, among the article of this case, the article of this case, "non-university 1" and "non-party 2's right to attend and speak at the board of directors of the Development Fund" cannot be concluded to be false. However, some of the articles of this case can be acknowledged as false. On the other hand, it cannot be readily concluded that the article of this case is false, because the article of this case, which is acknowledged by the evidence of this case, can not be concluded to be true. ② The article of this case was provided only to the article of this case, which is an interested party to the article of this case, and the article of this case was not provided with material of this case to the Busan University (which is called "non-party 3's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 3's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 2's non-party 3's non-party 2's non-party 3's non-party 1's non-party 3's non-party 2's opinion and the article of this case.

Therefore, this part of the defendants' assertion from different premise is without merit.

C. Scope of damages

Since it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the “○○○ Age” in which the article of this case was published was distributed to the general public that the reputation of the plaintiffs was damaged, Defendant 3, the direct originator of the article of this case, Defendant 4, and Defendant 1, the editor of the above Defendants, and Defendant 1, the employer of the above Defendants, have the obligation to pay damages to the plaintiffs in money.

Furthermore, with regard to the amount of damages that the Defendants are liable to compensate, the article of this case was prepared as a result of controversy between the Plaintiffs and Busan University regarding the donation of this case, and the Plaintiffs were also the parties to the case, and Defendant 1’s association appears to have recovered to a certain extent by publishing a counterargument report based on the first instance judgment, etc., considering various circumstances indicated in the arguments of this case, such as the title, content, publishing time and publication portion of the article of this case, the Plaintiffs’ social status and circumstances after the report of this case, etc., the consolation money which the Defendants are liable to compensate for to the Plaintiffs is set at KRW 5 million each, and the Defendants are liable to pay to each of the Plaintiffs five million each.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' primary claim for the corrective report against the defendant 1 incorporated association and the defendants' claim for damages are accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed due to the lack of reasons. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is partially unfair, the judgment of the court of first instance shall be modified as above (However, considering that the plaintiffs' primary claim for the corrective report against the defendant 1 incorporated association is the victim's right recognized as false and that the primary claim for the corrective report is the victim's right regardless of the authenticity of press reports, etc., it may be deemed that the primary and preliminary claim against the defendant 1 incorporated association does not fall under cases where it is logical incompatible. However, even if several conjunctive claims are logical incompatible, it is reasonable to judge according to the order of priority attached (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Da17633, Feb. 8, 2002; Supreme Court Decision 2001Da17633, Feb. 8, 2002).

Judge Han-chul (Presiding Judge)