1. The Defendants jointly share the Plaintiff with KRW 10 million and 5% per annum from April 18, 2017 to February 21, 2018.

1. The facts constituting the following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the facts described in Gap evidence 1 to 5 and the whole purport of the arguments as a result of the inquiry and reply to the head of the Seoul detention center or the head of the astronomical prison.

The Plaintiff’s relation (1) is a person appointed as a special prosecutor according to the “Act on the Appointment, etc. of Special Prosecutor for the Discovery of the G Government’s H Incident” around February 2016 while serving as a prosecutor and serving as an attorney at around February 2011 and serving as an attorney.

(2) Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is an online newspaper publishing company “I (hereinafter “I”)”, and Defendant E is an in-house director representing Defendant Company, who is the publisher and editor of the instant online newspaper, and Defendant F is an reporter belonging to Defendant Company.

B. On January 17, 2017, the news reportJ of each of the instant articles reported the same article as indicated in attached Table 1 under the title “K”.

On February 6, 2017, the Defendants cited the article of the said J on the online website of the instant online newspaper and posted the article as shown in attached Form 2 as “L” under the title of “L”.

(hereinafter “instant No. 1 engineer”). The following month:

9. The article as described in Appendix 3. as “M” was posted under the title of “M”.

(hereinafter “instant article 2”). The main contents of each of the instant articles are as follows.

(1) From the time when the Plaintiff was employed in N District Prosecutors’ Office, the Plaintiff was likely to have known and brought about the OF (P) who was a fraud offender, as seen below.

From the beginning of 2011, P refers to the creditors who pressured themselves as "Neman P chief prosecutor."

P has accepted the withdrawal of a complaint to the creditors with his own connection.

At the time, the plaintiff is the Director of Qua.