1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Basic Facts

The Defendant was established for the purpose of publishing Internet newspapers, magazines, etc., and operated the “unit News” (htp:/www. Twitnews.com) on the Internet website, and published articles on the said website.

Plaintiff

On February 7, 2016, the Ministry of National Defense, “The United States and the Republic of Korea,” as a measure to improve the U.S. defense attitude of the Korea-U.S.A. to cope with the increased threat of North Korea, determined at the level of the Korea-U.S.A.A.A. on the possibility of officially holding consultations on the possibility of the placement of the sads (of the end stage, high-level regional defense system, THAD, hereinafter “sads”).

On August 2, 2016, the Defendant posted the attached Form 20,000 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the “instant unanimous”) to criticize the Plaintiff’s decision on the posting of the Plaintiff’s POs on the Uniform News website.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 6, 9, and 2, and the purport of the entire argument of the lawsuit of this case as to the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case, the plaintiff and the defendant agreed to withdraw the lawsuit of this case if the plaintiff and the defendant published the plaintiff's counterargument report of this case as to the conclusion of the lawsuit of this case. Since the defendant published the above counterargument report, there is no legal interest in the lawsuit of this case.

If an agreement has been reached between the parties to withdraw the lawsuit, the lawsuit shall be dismissed as there is no legal interest in maintaining the lawsuit, barring special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 81Da1312, Mar. 9, 1982). In the event that the conditions have been fulfilled, there is no legal interest in maintaining the lawsuit when the conditions have been fulfilled.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da19571, Jul. 12, 2013). Meanwhile, in cases where the interpretation of a party’s intent with respect to an agreement in a lawsuit becomes an issue, the interpretation of litigation procedures shall be deliberated differently from the legal act under the substantive law.