2013Na35049 Damage, etc.

The Korean Press Workers' Headquarters A

A Stock Company

Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2012Gahap13294 Decided May 9, 2013

March 14, 2014

April 11, 2014

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

3. "A" in paragraph (1) of the main sentence of the judgment of the first instance;

1. Purport of claim

(a) The primary claim

(1) After being served with this judgment, the Defendant shall have the operator read the correction report listed in attached Form 1 on the first head of A (ER) which is first aired after being served with this judgment at a rapid speed than ordinary speed, and shall display the title and content of the correction report listed in attached Form 1 in white in a color on the screen on the screen on which the viewers can sufficiently recognize the title and content of the correction report in attached Form 1 while reading.

(2) If the Defendant did not perform the obligations set forth in paragraph (1) above, it shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 3,00,000 per day from the day following the first broadcasting day of this judgment until the completion of the performance.

(3) The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 10 million won with 20% interest per annum from the day after the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment.

(b) Preliminary claim

(1) After receiving this judgment, the Defendant shall have the conductor read the counterargument report as shown in attached Form 2 in the first head of AKER, which is first aired after being served with the judgment, at a rapid speed than ordinary progress, and one-time printing in white on the screen on the screen on which the viewers can sufficiently recognize the title and content of the counterargument report as described in the Category 2 in the crime, while reading.

(2) If the Defendant did not perform the obligations set forth in paragraph (1) above, it shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 3,00,000 per day from the day following the first broadcasting day of this judgment to the day the performance is completed.

[A) After the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit, the broadcasting time of A (D) was changed from 21:0 to 20:00, and the Plaintiff corrected the purport of the appeal by stating that it is AKER in the purport of the appeal)

2. Purport of appeal

A. The plaintiff's purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as stated in the purport of the claim.

B. The defendant's purport of appeal

The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s reasoning is as follows, and this Court’s reasoning is the same as the written judgment of the court of first instance except for the addition of this Court’s decision as follows. Thus, this Court’s reasoning is acceptable in accordance with the main text of Article

2. The further determination of this Court

A. The defendant's assertion

The content of the instant report is not that the Plaintiff’s members suffered injury to B, but that the Plaintiff’s members could not proceed to D due to the violent retirement behavior of the Plaintiff’s members, and it is violent acts by a majority, and B suffered injury in the process, and thereby did not proceed to D. Thus, it is consistent with objective truth.

In addition, even if the whole purport and important part are true, it is not reasonable to claim for a corrective report on the part, even if the part is not inconsistent with the fact, there is no legitimate interest in claiming for a corrective report.

B. Determination

The meaning of the language is not fixed and its meaning is changed depending on the relation between the words used in the language book, the relationship between the words used in the language book, the words before and after, the situation of the speech, the relationship between the person and the hearing person, etc.

Therefore, as the defendant's assertion, whether the report of this case expressed only the wide causal relationship between the injury of B and the retirement of this case, or whether the plaintiff's members suffered injury to B as alleged by the plaintiff should be determined accordingly.

피고의 주장에 따르더라도, 이 사건 퇴근저지 과정에서 원고 조합원들과 B 사이에 직접적인 접촉이 없었고, 원고 조합원들에 밀린 청원경찰과 B 사이에도 아무런 접촉이 없었으며(피고는 처음에는 원고 조합원들에 의해 밀린 청원경찰에 다시 밀려 B이 다쳤다고 주장하다가, 이 법원의 마지막 변론기일에서 그 주장을 철회하였다), B이 허리를 다친 것은 원고 조합원들의 폭력적인 행동에 당황한 B이 계단에서 발을 헛디뎠기 때 문이라는 것이다.

“The expression “in the process” is used in cases where it is not clear who caused the result as the Defendant’s argument. However, the Defendant knew that the injury suffered is not due to the conflict or physical contact with the Plaintiff’s union members. As such, the Defendant cannot be said to have written the expression “in the process of the instant report.”

In addition, it does not have any reason to report on the part that "B stalker, which was flicker, was flicker, in the process of preventing the retirement of the union members, while the plaintiff union members, such as the leavinger of this case, had a direct causal relationship with the injury of the plaintiff union members, and this does not require any judgment of normative legal causal relationship." Thus, the part that "B stalker was flicker, in the process of preventing the retirement of union members, who was flicker, was flicker, in a part of vaddi, which was flicker's physical damage

Furthermore, instead of expression, “herb,” F and E used the expression “satis” as part of body that is not well used in daily language life, together with words such as “satching,” “labor assistant,” “satis,” “satis,” “satis,” “low,” and E poper reported the fact that he was shocked by the head of the news reporting headquarters in part of body, such as “on board a vehicle”.

In this context, the report of this case shows a false fact that the plaintiff members suffered physical shock in part of the news report of this case, including the fact that the news report of this case seems to have fighting, another news report of this case, the news report of this case, the news report of this case, the news report of this case, the news report of this case, the news report of this case, the news report of this case, and the news report of this case, the news report of this case, the news report of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of 1, 2, and 3, the news report of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of 1, 3, the news report of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of 1, 2, and the news report of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of 1, 300,000

3. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's primary claim is reasonable within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are groundless (as long as a claim for a corrective statement is partially accepted, it shall not be judged separately as to the conjunctive claim which is the claim for a corrective statement). The judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff and the defendant's appeal are dismissed as it is without merit, and all of them are dismissed. In accordance with the correction of the plaintiff's claims, "A" in Article 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance in accordance with the correction of the plaintiff's claims, "A is corrected

presiding judge's accident management

Judge Goo-de

Judges