logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.07.26 2017가합105324
손해배상(기)
Text

1. Defendant F, G, H, and I jointly share KRW 1,00,000 to Plaintiff A, as well as the Plaintiff from November 18, 2016.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff church is a religious organization that was created by J around 1962, and whose father is the J, the Plaintiff B is replaced by her mother, her Saturdays, observe Saturdays, observe Saturdays, and comply with seasons, etc.

Plaintiff

C is from the death of the J in 1985 to the general assembly of the plaintiff church.

B. The Defendants are members of “K” Internet Cafe (L; hereinafter “1 Internet Cafe”) and “M” Internet Cafe (N; hereinafter “2 Internet Cafe”) and Defendant D concurrently serves as an operator of 1 Internet Cafe.

C. Defendant F, G, H, and I (hereinafter “Defendant G, etc.”) uses “O (O) P, and hereinafter “O” as a group ID in the first and second Internet page.

Defendant G, etc. posted, from February 1, 2014 to February 5, 2017, a letter of the same content as indicated in attached Table 1, i.e., the ID of this case, and posted, from April 11, 2014 to June 24, 2016, a letter of the same photograph as shown in attached Table 2 (hereinafter referred to as “the photograph”).

In addition, on January 11, 2015, the title " Q" was posted on the Internet page 2 Internet page of this case, and a notice was posted on the file for recording telephone conversations (attached Form 137, as well as a photograph No. 137; hereinafter "the file of this case") of Plaintiff B and third parties. From February 9, 2014 to March 25, 2015, a notice was posted on the Internet page 1 and 2 Internet page containing pictures, such as images as shown in attached Table 3, (b).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 14, 20, 24, 29 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence No. 2-1, Eul evidence No. 1, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion that Defendant G et al. repeatedly posted an insulting and definite personal attack on the 1 and 2 Internet page using the ID of this case.

arrow