beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 10,000,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual interest thereon from April 22, 2016 to September 14, 2018.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a medical doctor operating the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Csung Foreign Medical Center (hereinafter “Plaintiff Hospital”). The Defendant is a person who has undergone a visual therapy from the E president in the Dsung Foreign Medical Department, and the E president has served as a doctor who received a salary from the Plaintiff hospital from November 10, 2014.
B. On July 15, 2015, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff hospital is responsible for the side effects caused by E-coping surgery, but did not fulfill its responsibility, and raised complaints. On July 15, 2015, the Defendant, despite having not undergone the surgery at the Plaintiff hospital, posted a false notice and comments (hereinafter “the instant notice”) on the Internet portal site FC bulletin board, “I” under the title of “J”, by accessing the Internet Port site FC (web Address H) to the clinic, and then erroneously posted a false notice and comments (hereinafter “the instant notice”).
C. The Defendant filed a complaint against the Defendant on July 7, 2017, and the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of two million won due to a violation of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (Defamation) and a obstruction of business (Seoul Western District Court 2016DaMa965), and the Defendant appealed, but the appeal was dismissed on November 23, 2017 by Seoul Western District Court 2017No916, and the Defendant filed a final appeal and is currently in progress in the Supreme Court.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 18, 23, 29, 34 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that, at the time when E, a doctor affiliated with the Plaintiff hospital worked at another hospital, he/she had been administered by E, but the Plaintiff hospital did not undergo a sex surgery or surgery, and the Plaintiff hospital misleads the Defendant to conduct a surgery without any sex.