beta
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2018.05.15 2016가단256787

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 500,000 and the following day to the Plaintiff annually from August 23, 2014 to May 15, 2018.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. In relation to the structure of the sinking accident of the Sewol ferry of the third day, the Plaintiff had an interview with a general programming channel D. The interview was broadcasted at C.M. on the third day, and the articles related to the Plaintiff were reported by many media companies.

B. On August 23, 2014, the Defendant, who was a minor, posted the Plaintiff’s writing and photograph posted on the Internet site beevos storage, as the title “E” on his Blouse bulletin board (hereinafter “instant bulletin board”).

The posted photograph is a composite photograph in such a manner as to be seen by the President of the Republic of Korea and the Plaintiff sexual intercourse by combining the Plaintiff’s face in the opening part of the body with a photograph of a dog and a sexual intercourse, and the following part of the photograph is written as “the year in which he/she will receive a fixed amount of he/shebs in the Seoul Station every year.”

Other posted photographs include the Plaintiff’s Twitter’s address, photograph, and name: “I search for the portion written on bee. I stick with ice equipment on the face and sticked with the face, and the face so that I can drink. G, and the third party is a photograph containing the content that the Plaintiff himself/herself write as if he/she was written in the Twitter.”

C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff was indicted on January 9, 2015 as the facts charged that the Plaintiff damaged the honor of the Commissioner General of the Korea Coast Guard, etc. by openly pointing out false facts with respect to the interview with the Korea Press. However, on January 9, 2015, the Plaintiff was acquitted from the above support of the Gwangju District Court. The Prosecutor appealed to the Gwangju District Court 2015No200 and the indictment was modified, but the said court acquitted the Plaintiff on September 1, 2016.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, and 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts, the defendant is liable for damages according to the occurrence and scope of liability.