1. Defendant B Co., Ltd. within seven days from the date this judgment became final and conclusive,

(a) The initial screen of the Internet homepage D;

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an incorporated association established for the purpose of protecting the rights and interests of F and improving the quality thereof. Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) publish the E press, which is the main place, and runs the Internet homepage D, and Defendant C is an article belonging to Defendant B.

B. Defendant B, on May 21, 2018, as the larger title of “G” prepared by Defendant C on the Internet homepage of Defendant B, May 22, 2018, as the article of this case, “I, I, J, and K” as the smaller title.

A. The article posted, and the specific contents of the article are as shown in attached Table 3. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in Gap evidence 1 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. Determination as to the request for a corrective report

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the article of this case contains contents that are not true as follows, and as a result, the Plaintiff suffered damage, Defendant B shall make a corrective report as shown in attached Form 2.

1) The instant article states that “the Plaintiff, along with the supplementary training training that is a legal educator, held a LAR and MM exhibition and made profits of at least one billion won (hereinafter “part 1 of the instant article”).” (hereinafter “part 1 of the instant article”).

(2) However, the Plaintiff did not link the aforementioned events while holding the L Research Competition and M Exhibitions, which is a completely independent event from the supplementary training course, and did not add more than one billion won, and instead did not bring about losses as a result of holding the L Research Contest, and the contents of the article are false reports. Moreover, the Plaintiff’s profits exceeding two times of the general exhibition are not true reports as to the participation cost that cannot be uniformly compared with the contents that the Plaintiff left more than two times of the general exhibition. 2) In the instant article, the Plaintiff’s receiving business cooperation, etc. from the Plaintiff while holding the L Research Competition and M is below the Act on the Prohibition of Acceptance of Improper Solicitation and Graft.