1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. At the time of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the designated parties C and the members of the other Diplomatic Association, who were officers of the Diplomatic Association affiliated with the Diplomatic Association of the above C, had committed an illegal act, such as cancelling the Plaintiff’s right to use the land and building by in collusioning the Plaintiff to threaten the Plaintiff in a planned and systematic manner and providing bribe to the Mongolian government in order to cut off the Plaintiff’s land and building in the Mongolian country.

Ultimately, the plaintiff was demoted to the above land and buildings in the state of receiving the down payment, and the plaintiff returned to Korea, and conducted one person's demonstration to inform C of the illegal acts committed by the designated parties of the Drown tree as well as C.

In spite of the Plaintiff’s explicit expression of refusal to take photographs, the Defendant and the designated parties (hereinafter “Defendants”) taken photographs of the Plaintiff’s demonstration as above on several occasions.

This is an obvious tort that infringes upon the plaintiff's portrait rights. The defendants are jointly and severally liable to compensate the plaintiff for consolation money of KRW 10,000,000 and damages for delay for mental suffering.

2. Determination

A. Any person has a right not to have his/her face and other physical characteristics recognizable as a specific person by social norms taken, described, or disclosed without permission, and to be used for profit. Such portrait rights are constitutional rights guaranteed by the first sentence of Article 10 of the Constitution, and unfair infringement of portrait rights is a tort, and there is mental pain to the infringing person, unless there are special circumstances.

In addition, the above infringement was done at a public place.

or for the purpose of collecting evidence of civil action shall not be justified on the sole ground that it was conducted for the purpose of

(Supreme Court Decision 2010Da39277 Decided January 27, 2012, and Supreme Court Decision 2004Da16280 Decided October 13, 2006, etc.) B.

However, Gap's 1 to 1.