logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.05.10 2017나61889
손해배상 (사용자배상책임)
Text

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.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, and they are quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are the same as the reasons for the judgment

2. Parts to be dried or added;

A. The volume of the enemy shall be, on the third page of the judgment of the court of first instance, the second sentence shall be read as “not guilty” and the defendant and A” in the same sentence shall be read as “public prosecutor”, respectively.

In the fourth decision of the court of first instance, the following third to the last reduction shall be stated:

According to the above evidence, since the specific contents of the article posted by B on the Plaintiff’s website are the contents of asking the Plaintiff about the current status of enrollment in the Plaintiff or about the existence of playgrounds and whether a sports facility has been equipped, it is difficult to view that there is illegality in the content itself, and it is only reasonable to recognize illegality in the behavior that B excessively repeated and repeated. In light of the fact that the content of the article posted by B itself is difficult to deem illegality in the content itself, it is insufficient to recognize that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff to the court of first instance and this court alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the cancellation of entry alleged by the Plaintiff was caused by the above inquiry by B, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it."

B. Further determination 1 ② The plaintiff asserts that since the plaintiff's reputation was damaged due to the illegal act in B and the plaintiff's work was obstructed, the defendant is obligated to pay consolation money to the plaintiff as the employer in B.

First of all, according to the above facts and the evidence revealed above, the defamation part is caused by the above inquiries of B.

arrow