1. Defendant D, E, G, H, I, and J are KRW 100,00 each to the Plaintiff, and Defendant D with respect thereto from June 4, 2019, and Defendant E.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. From February 2007, the Plaintiff operated an individual broadcasting station under the name of “K” as “L”, which is an Internet personal broadcasting service operated by K from February 2, 2007.

B. A monthly broadcast that the Plaintiff proceeds from “M” is broadcast from 11 A.m. to 2 P.m., from T.m. to T.m., from T.m. to T.m., from T.m. to T.m., and re-broadcasting is broadcast during the remaining hours.

The Plaintiff’s address, telephone number, e-mail, etc. are disclosed on the screen of “M”.

C. The Defendants connected K with each of the following IDs, and posted the following articles on the wing bank of M:

피고 아이디 게시글 내용 일자 B O 와 저거 리얼빨갱이네 ㅋㅋㅋ 2019.6.8. C P 빨갱이 2019.6.8. D Q 내가볼 때는 이 방이 사이비 같은데 좌파천국 L 사이비교주 / 5천명 시청자 사이비신도들 2019.6.4. E R 정의코스프레하는 종북년 개역겹다 2019.6.2. X로 빻아뿔라 이즈아빨년 2019.4.25. F S 빨갱이 개독 2019.5.31. G T 이거 완전 빨갱이년이네 제목봐라 지금시국이 간첩아냐 제목 참 어이없내 2019.5.30. H U 이년 하는말은 맨날 카더라 ㅋㅋ 개역겹게생겨가지고 2019.5.29 I V 이 간첩년아 2019.5.27. J W 좌파년 2019.5.26. [인정근거] 다툼 없는 사실, 갑 제1 내지 10호증(가지번호 포함)의 각 기재, 변론 전체의 취지

2. Determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant D, E, G, H, I, and J

A. In a case where an expressive act that caused damage to another person expressed a critical opinion, if the form and content of such expressive act constitutes an insulting and anti-defensive personal attack, thereby infringing on the relevant personal right, it can be deemed as tort as exceeding the bounds of the expression of opinion.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Da65494, Apr. 9, 2009; 2014Da220798, Jun. 13, 2019). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, it is deemed that the said legal doctrine has been applied.