2013 Gohap 50737 Damage, etc.

1. Analo;

2. Lighting. ○○

3. Maternum;

4. The person becomes aware;

5. Ansan △△;

6. An internal investigation agency;

Since the plaintiff 3 through 6 is a minor, a person with parental authority

father ○○, Matern○○

[Judgment of the court below]

Attorney Lee Jin-young, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

○○ Co., Ltd.

Law Firm (Li) Won

Attorney Yellow-sik, Lee Chang-chul, Counsel for defendant-appellant

March 5, 2014

March 19, 2014

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff ○○, ○○, and 00 won each of 3,00,000, and 21,000,000, and to the Plaintiff △△△△△△, respectively, 1,000,000, and 5% per annum from September 15, 2012 to March 19, 2014, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. A. Within seven days from the date the judgment of this case became final and conclusive, the Defendant deletes all the news listed in [Attachment 1], 2, 3, and 5] posted on the Defendant’s Internet homepage (htp: / www.O.co. km).

B. If the Defendant fails to perform the obligation described in the above paragraph (a) within the said period, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff Ansan○○ at the rate of KRW 1,00,000 per day from the day following the expiration of the period to the day of completion of the performance.

3. The plaintiffs' remaining claims are dismissed.

4. 2/3 of the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs, and the remainder is assessed against the defendant.

5. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The Defendant: 50,00,000, 000, 15,000, 15,000, 000, 000, 15,000, and 15,000, respectively, to the Plaintiff

Madrecker’s 10,00,000 won, the plaintiff’s internal office, and Ansan-gu to 5,00,100 won, and each of the said money, respectively.

The delivery date of the complaint of this case from September 15, 2012 to the delivery date of the complaint of this case shall be 5% per annum, and the day of full payment from the following day.

up to twenty percent (20%) per annum. The defendant shall pay the amount from the date when the judgment of this case became final and conclusive.

Within 7 days from the defendant's Internet homepage (htp: / www.O.co. km) listed in attached Form 1. List

All news will be deleted. Where the defendant does not perform his/her duties within the prescribed period.

Defendant’s day from the day after the expiration of the period set above to the day after the completion of performance.

The sum of 1,00,000 won shall be paid.

1. Basic facts

A. Status of the parties

On August 30, 2012: Around 02: Around 00, the Plaintiff, while she was divingd at the home, is a victim of sexual assault. The Plaintiff, ○○, and ○○○ is the parent, the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff, and △△△△△△△△, the Plaintiff’s △△△△△△△△, and the Defendant, as a broadcasting company, shows the news report program and the ○○○○○○○○○’s news, which are the news report program, and the website (http: / www. O.co. c. c.) on which the services, such as news, re-mail, are provided.

B. On August 30, 2012, 01: 00, ○○○ had been able to talk and talk with Plaintiff △○○○ in the PC room located in the city of her country, and the Plaintiff ○○ was under the influence of alcohol at home. The Plaintiff ○○ entered the Plaintiff’s house with the time sent from the PC to the PC, and was able to rape the Plaintiff ○○’s father’s father’s care, and 01:30 on the same day, the Plaintiff ○ was able to kill the Defendant 1 and her family members in the process of committing the instant crime (hereinafter “the instant crime”). The Plaintiff △△△△△△△△△△△, who was in a cover of the instant violence, was not able to kill the Defendant 1 and her family members in the process of committing the instant crime (hereinafter “the instant crime of murdered the Defendant △△△△△△△△△△△△△, etc.”). The instant crime of murdering the Defendant 2’s family members.

다. 피고의 뉴스 보도 및 시사프로그램 방영1 ) 피고는 2012. 8. 31. 20 : 08경 ' ○○ 뉴스 ' 프로그램에서 「 나주 초등생 성폭행범 검거 … " 술김에 저질렀다 " 라는 제목하에 [ 고씨는 … 밤늦게 근처 PC방에 갔다가 3, 4년 전 나주에서 살 때 알게 된 피해 아동의 엄마를 만나서 인사까지 나눴습니다 ]라는 내용이 포함된 별지 2. 기재 뉴스를 방영하면서, 원고들의 집 내부를 클로즈업하여 촬영한 영상 ( 이불이 바닥에 어질러져 있는 모습이 드러나 있다 ) 을 내보냈다 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 제1뉴스 ' 라 한다 ) .

2 ) 피고는 2012. 8. 31. 20 : 16경 ' ○○ 뉴스 ' 프로그램에서 「 나주 성폭행범, 범행 순간 던진 한마디 ' 섬뜩 ' 이라는 제목하에 [ 고 씨는 한때 피해 어린이의 아버지에 겐 이모부, 어머니에겐 이모라고 부를 정도로 안면이 있는 사이였던 것으로 알려졌습니다. 범행 당일 집 근처 피시방에서 만난 피해 어린이 어머니에겐 " 아이들은 잘 있느냐 " 는 안부 인사까지 건넸습니다 ] 라는 내용이 포함된 별지 3. 기재 뉴스를 방영하면서 , 원고들의 집 내부를 클로즈업하여 촬영한 영상 ( 빨래건조대, 소파 등이 어질러져 있는 모습, 책상과 책장, 신발 등의 모습이 드러나 있다 ) 을 내보냈다 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 제2뉴스 ' 라 한다 ) .

3) On August 31, 2012: around 13, 2012, the Defendant broadcasted the news listed in attached Form 4, under the title that “○○ News” program is about five minutes, five hours, and five hours, which is controversial at the police first place. The Defendant displayed the images (e.g., as soon as the cryp, so that the cryp, small waves, etc. are displayed on the floor) taken by cryping the inside of the Plaintiffs’ house (hereinafter “instant news 3”).

4 ) 피고는 2012. 9. 1. 20 : 13경 ' ○○ 뉴스 ' 프로그램에서 「 나주 초등생 성폭행범 " 언니 노렸다 " 계획 범행 」 이라는 제목하에 [ 고○○은 범행 한 달 전에도 나주에 와서 평소 ' 이모 ' 라고 부르던 피해 아동 엄마의 집을 미리 확인한 것으로 드러났습니다. 그는 이렇게 집을 알아뒀다가 12살짜리 첫째 딸을 노리고 범행에 나섰는데, 납치해 놓고 보니 동생이었다고 진술했습니다 ] 라는 내용이 포함된 별지 5. 기재 뉴스를 방영하였다 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 제4뉴스 ' 라 한다 ) . 5 ) 피고는 2012. 9. 2. 20 : 14경 ' ○○ 뉴스 ' 프로그램에서 「 장기간 치료 필요한 피해 아동, 치료비 ' 막막 ' 」 이라는 제목하에 별지 6. 기재 뉴스를 방영하면서, 원고들의 집 내부를 클로즈업하여 촬영한 영상 ( 빨래건조대, 소파 등이 어질러져 있는 모습, 상위의 냄비, 거실 바닥에 어질러져 있는 빨래 등의 모습이 드러나 있다 ) 을 내보냈다 ( 이하 ' 이 사건 제5뉴스 ' 라 하고, 이 사건 제1 내지 제5뉴스를 합하여 ' 이 사건 각 뉴스 ' 라한다 ) .

6) On September 15, 2012, the Defendant broadcast the contents related to the instant crime under the title of “○○○○” in the instant program, i.e., the 16-minute of class 16 minutes of the △△△△△△△△△’s upper part photograph (the face, distribution, loss, bridge, excluding the upper part). The Plaintiff’s upper part of the △△△△△△△△△△△△△ was processed with the upper part excluding the face, distribution, hand, bridge, and the upper part excluding the upper part). The Plaintiff’s image (the upper part only was processed with the upper part) viewed from the appearance of the Plaintiff’s home at a distance of the Plaintiff’s home, with three photographs taken by the Plaintiff, three copies of the △△△△△△△△△△△△△△’s photo taken with her friendship, and the reading records, street taken by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant current program”).

7) Each of the news of this case is published in the news category among the news website (www: htp: / www.O.co. km operated by the Defendant) operated by the Defendant up to now. Meanwhile, the current news program of this case was voluntarily deleted by the Defendant immediately after the broadcast was bhered.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 to 5, Gap evidence 4, Gap evidence 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion

A. Defamation;

① The Defendant indicated false facts, such as the Plaintiff’s Ma○○ and the Plaintiff’s Ma○○ was a mother, thereby impairing the Plaintiff’s Ma○○ and Ma○○○’s reputation by going through the PC, etc. instead, rather than seeing the Plaintiff’s Ma○○ and Ma○○○, thereby impairing the Plaintiff’s reputation. ② Ma○○ and Ma○○ by expressing false facts that the Plaintiff’s Ma○○ became a victim of sexual assault by stating that the Plaintiff’s Ma○○ and Ma○ could have become a victim of sexual assault by suggesting false facts that the Plaintiff’s Ma○ became a Ma○○ and Ma○○.

The Plaintiff’s reputation was damaged.

B. Infringement of privacy, freedom, and portrait rights

① The Defendant: (a) taken photographs of the Plaintiff’s wife; (b) taken photographs of the Plaintiff’s home; (c) taken pictures of the Plaintiff’s home; (d) taken by the Plaintiff’s △△△△△△△△△△△△△△△; (e) disclosed all of the images taken inside the Plaintiff’s home; and (vi) infringed upon the Plaintiffs’ home in the process, thereby infringing on the Plaintiffs’ privacy, freedom of privacy, and portrait rights.

C. tort liability

The Defendant is liable for damages for the Plaintiffs’ emotional distress caused by tort, such as defamation, freedom of privacy, and portrait rights, and thus, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff △△△△△△△ KRW 50,00,000,000, respectively, 15,000,000,000 won to the Plaintiff, and to the Plaintiff, within the limit of 10,000,000,000,000 to the Plaintiff, and damages for delay to the Plaintiff, respectively. Furthermore, the Defendant shall delete each of the news listed in the list as an appropriate measure for the restoration of the Plaintiffs’ reputation.

3. Whether tort liability arises

A. Whether defamation is established

1) General theory

In order to establish defamation by news reports, a statement of facts must be made by a specific statement of facts that may undermine the victim's social assessment. Here, the expression of facts is not limited to cases where a direct statement of facts is made. Even in cases of indirect and round-up expressions, it is sufficient to suggest the existence of such facts in light of the overall purport of the expression, and thereby, it is sufficient that there is a possibility that a specific person's social value or assessment may be infringed. In addition, whether the contents of a television broadcast report contain any content that impairs a specific person's reputation, along with the objective contents of the relevant broadcast report, should be determined based on the overall impression of the report, on the basis of a general viewer's understanding of a broadcast report with ordinary care (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Da53387, Feb. 27, 2004, etc.).

앞서 본 바와 같이 피고는 이 사건 제1, 2, 4뉴스를 통하여 『 고○○은 밤늦게 근처 PC방에 갔다가 3, 4년 전 나주에서 살 때 알게 된 원고 조○○를 만나서 인사까지 나눴다, 고○○은 한때 원고 안○○에게는 이모부, 원고 조○○에게는 이모라고부를 정도로 안면이 있는 사이였다, 이 사건 범죄 당일 집 근처 PC방에서 만난 원고 조○○에게 " 아이들은 잘 있느냐 " 는 안부 인사까지 건넸다, 고○○은 한 달 전에도 나주에 와서 평소 ' 이모 ' 라고 부르던 원고 조○○의 집을 미리 확인한 것으로 드러났다 .는 사실들을 적시하였는바, 위 각 뉴스의 전체적인 취지와 문맥 등을 종합하여 볼 때 , 위 각 뉴스는 원고 안○○, 조○○가 고○○과 친밀한 관계에 있었다 』 는 사실을 암시함으로써, 원고 안○○, 조○○의 사회적 평가를 저하시켜 명예를 훼손하였다고 할 것이다 .

3) The part that initially committed the crime of the plaintiff's knives

As seen earlier, the Defendant stated the facts that “the ○○○ initially started to commit a crime by slicking the Plaintiff’s slickum through the instant news.” However, such facts are merely the intent of slick○○○○’s internal deliberation, and even if disclosure of such facts leads to the Plaintiff’s slickum’s slickum’s slickum’s slickum’s slickum’s slickum’s slickum’s slickum’s slickum’s slickum’s slickum’s slickum’

B. Whether the illegality of defamation is denied

1) The defendant's assertion

Of the news of this case, the part pointed out by the plaintiffs is public interest as the purpose of the report of this case, and its content is true, and even if not, there is considerable reason to believe that it is true. 2) Even if the media used the media to release facts to the public for the purpose of the public interest, if the purpose is solely for the public interest, it shall be deemed that the actor believed it to be true or there is no reasonable reason to believe it, even if the stated fact is proved to be true or there is no proof to prove it. Thus, the phrase "when the purpose is solely for the public interest" refers to the expression of the fact for the public interest when it is objectively viewed as related to the stated fact, and it refers to the expression of the fact for the public interest. If the main purpose or motive of the actor is for the public interest, it is unreasonable to believe that it is true, and even if the main purpose or motive is stated, the phrase "real fact" in this case is somewhat different from the objective fact, 200 or 203.

In addition, the issue of whether an actor has a reasonable ground to believe the alleged truth shall be determined in light of the fact that the actor has conducted an adequate and sufficient investigation to verify the authenticity of the content thereof by taking into account various circumstances, such as the content of the alleged fact, the grounds for believing the truth as the truth, the certainty and credibility of the evidence, the easiness of confirmation of the fact, and the degree of damage to the victim caused by the timely statement. The truth is supported by objective and reasonable data or evidence. The time of determination shall be based on the point of expression, but even if it is judged at the time of expression, the authenticity and reasonableness at the time of expression can be determined by referring to the facts revealed before and after the expression, so evidence collected after the expression may also be used as evidence for its determination (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Da5823, Jan. 24, 2008; 2008Da84236, Sept. 9, 2010).

B) However, in setting the limitation between the freedom of press and publication, there is a difference between whether the expression is a public figure or a private figure, whether the expression concerns a matter of public interest or a purely private sphere, whether the expression concerns a matter of public interest or a matter of public interest, and whether it contributes to the formation of public opinion or public debate as it concerns a matter of public nature or sociality that the citizen should know objectively, and whether the expression contributes to the formation of public opinion or public debate. In addition, if the expression concerns a matter of private sphere, the personality right to protection of reputation can take precedence over the freedom of the press, but if the expression concerns a matter of public and social meaning, it should be evaluated differently and the limitation on the freedom of the press should be mitigated (see Supreme Court Decision 200Da37524, 37531, Jan. 22, 2002).

In particular, in reporting a crime case, it is believed that the reporting of a crime case in the mass media generally critically follows the behavior of the crime, how the legal sanctions are realized when it violates the contents and the social norms, how the social and cultural conditions of the crime are clarified, and that the reporting of a crime case in the mass media plays the role of providing information necessary for the formation of public opinion by considering the social and cultural circumstances of the crime and considering the social measures therefor, etc. Therefore, the reporting of a crime case in the mass media can be treated as public nature. However, it is not necessary to clearly state the personal information of the victim of the crime or his family members in order to report the crime itself, and its report does not necessarily have the same character as the reporting of the crime itself, and in particular, it is more true in the case of reporting of a sexual assault victim and his family members who may suffer fatal secondary damage through a press report (see Supreme Court Decision 96Da17257, Jul. 14, 198, etc.).

In light of the above facts that the plaintiff ○○ and Ma○○ had a close relationship with the plaintiff ○○ and Ma○○○, and whether the defendant’s above reports have public interest or interest, as seen earlier, in light of the characteristics of the instant crime, etc., the facts about how Ma○○ became aware of the plaintiffs and how much it is a close relationship with the plaintiffs are within the extent that it is inevitable to inevitably indicate for the purpose of reporting the background of the instant crime. Thus, it is recognized that matters concerning public interest and the purpose of the report are for the public interest.

나아가, 그와 같은 사실이 진실한 것인지를 살피건대, 고○○의 경찰 진술 ( 을 8호증 ) 에 의하면, 고○○은 약 5, 6년 전에 PC방 근처에서 분식집을 하였고 PC방에서도 가끔 만난 적이 있는 원고 조○○를 이 사건 범죄 당시 PC방에서 우연히 만나게 되었다, 한 달 전쯤에 PC방에서 원고 조○○를 만났을 때 ' 전에 분식집을 찾아갔는데 주인이 바뀌어 있더라, 어디로 간 것이냐 ' 고 물어보았고 원고 조○○가 맞은 편으로 옮겼다고 이야기해 주어서 집 위치를 알게 되었다는 것이고, 원고 조○○의 경찰 진술 ( 을 9호증 ) 에 의하면, 이 사건 범죄 당시 고○○이 PC방에 들어오는 것을 보고 금방 알아보았다, 고○○이 자신에게 와서 매형은 잘 있어요, 애들은 잘 있어요, 매형하고 술을 한잔해야 되는데 라고 말을 건넸다, 고○○과는 그렇게 친한 사이는 아니고 5, 6년 전에 분식집을 할 때 손님으로 몇 번 와서 알게 되었고 오다가다 인사를 하는 정도 이다, 고○○이 집 앞을 지나가면서 여기가 집이냐고 물어서 그렇다고 말해준 적이 있다, 고○○과 원고 안○○은 몇 번 얼굴을 본 적이 있고 인사를 하는 정도일 뿐 친한 사이는 아니다, 원고들의 가족관계를 알고 있다는 것인바, 이를 종합하여 볼 때, 피고의 이 부분 보도는 세부적인 사항에서 원고 안○○에 대한 호칭을 ' 매형 ' 이 아닌 ' 이모부 ' 로 적시하는 등 진실과 약간 차이가 나거나 그 외에 다소 과장된 표현이 있는 점은 인정된다 하더라도, 고○○이 원고 안○○, 조○○를 매형, 이모로 호칭하는 등 어느 정도의 친분은 있는 사이였다는 중요한 부분에 있어서는 객관적 사실과 합치된다고 할 것이어서 전체적으로 진실한 것이라고 봄이 타당하므로 위법성이 조각된다고 할 것이 4 ) 소결론

Therefore, all of the plaintiffs' arguments that the defendant reported each of the news of this case and damaged the reputation of the plaintiffs are without merit.

C. Whether it infringes on the privacy, freedom, portrait, etc.

1) General theory

Article 10 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea provides that "All citizens shall have dignity and value as human beings and have the right to pursue happiness." Article 17 of the same Act provides that "All citizens shall not be infringed on privacy." Articles 316 and 317 of the Criminal Act provide that "the act of infringing or divulging certain individual secrets to protect the privacy and peace of individuals." In full view of these provisions, a person shall have a legal interest not to be disclosed to others without permission. Thus, matters concerning the privacy of an individual shall be protected as a secret unless they are related to public interest, unless they are subject to legitimate public interest, and unfairly disclosing them shall constitute tort (see Supreme Court Decision 96Da11327 delivered on September 4, 1998, etc.).

As seen earlier, the Defendant, through the instant news program and the instant current news program, disclosed the images of the Plaintiffs’ house located in the sphere of their privacy and the images of viewing the appearance of the Plaintiff’s house that could identify the location of the Plaintiff’s house without the Plaintiffs’ consent, thereby infringing on the Plaintiffs’ privacy and freedom of privacy. 3) The disclosure of the images of the images of the Plaintiff’s top-down of the △△△△△△△△△△△△△△, along with their friendship, taken by the Plaintiff and the Defendant, along with their friendship, pictures taken by the Plaintiff, the pictures taken by the △△△△△△△△△△△△△△

As seen earlier, without the consent of the Plaintiff, △△△△, and △△△△, a parent of the Plaintiff, through the instant current news program, the Defendant’s photographed the upper place belonging to the private life of the Plaintiff, without the Plaintiff’s consent of △△△△△△, along with her friendship group, and opened a reading book, street, and picture prepared by the Plaintiff, △△△△△△△△△, thereby infringing on the Plaintiffs’ privacy and freedom of privacy, and the Plaintiff’s portrait right was also infringed on the Plaintiff’s portrait right. 4) Since the Defendant asserted that the Defendant infringed on the Plaintiff’s portrait’s right to privacy in the course of photographing the news of this case, the other parts of the images taken inside the Plaintiff’s house were considered to have infringed on the Plaintiff’s right to privacy, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant, in light of the Plaintiff’s internal and external rules, was unable to take the Plaintiff’s private life.

D. Whether illegality against infringement, such as privacy, freedom, portrait, etc. is discovered

1) The defendant's assertion

The contents of each of the news of this case, which the plaintiffs pointed out, are all necessary to explain the cause, background, field situation, etc. of the crime of this case, and to draw public opinion about child sexual assault cases, and was a report on public matters related to public interest, which are subject to legitimate public interest. The public interest to be achieved through such disclosure is larger than the damage that the plaintiffs will incur due to public interest, and there is no illegality. 2) The general theory is not unlawful.

In a case where a media organization reports a matter belonging to the private life of an individual, the illegality may be avoided if it is a matter of public interest. In addition, in a case where two different directions conflict surrounding the act of infringing the privacy, the final illegality of the act of infringement is likely to be committed through a balancing of interests by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances in a specific case. In the course of balancing of interests, first, the factors belonging to the area of infringement include the content and importance of the profit to be achieved by the act of infringement, the necessity and effectiveness of the act of infringement, the supplement and urgency of the act of infringement, and the reasonableness of the method of infringement. Second, the factors belonging to the area of the damaged interest include the content and importance of the profit to be gained by the act of infringement, the degree of damage suffered by the victim, and the protection value of the damaged interest. On the other hand, the fact that the assessed act of infringing the protection area of the right constitutes a tort should be proved by the claimant (see Supreme Court Decision 204Da12680, Oct. 13, 2006).

In particular, in the report of a crime case like this case, it is believed that the report of a crime in the mass media generally follows the behavior of the crime, the contents of the social norms and how the legal sanctions are realized if they violate them, and furthermore, the report of a crime in the mass media is regarded as a matter of public interest, such as providing information necessary for formation of public opinion by clarifying the social and cultural conditions of the crime and considering the social measures against them. Therefore, the report of a crime in the mass media can be treated as a matter of public interest. However, it is not necessarily necessary to clearly state the personal information of the victim or his family members in order to report the crime itself, and it is not necessary to say that the report has the character such as the report on the crime itself, and in particular, it is more true in the case of a report on the victim of a sexual assault and his family members who may suffer fatal second damage due to a press report (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da17257, Mar. 3, 197).

6) According to the following circumstances, ○○○ △△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△’s internal living and specific atmosphere after the Plaintiffs’ internal appearance were revealed (such as so-called, so-called “△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△” as follows. (2) The Defendant appears to have taken pictures inside and outside of the Plaintiffs’ home without the Plaintiffs’ consent to disclose the Plaintiff’s photograph, including the Plaintiff’s photograph, on the following grounds: (a) it appears that the Defendant could have been aware of the Defendant’s personal location of the Defendant’s home and △△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△△’s removal of the Plaintiff’s home.

In full view of the above circumstances, matters concerning the privacy of the plaintiffs, which the defendant disclosed through the news of this case and the present program of this case, do not necessarily constitute an inevitable disclosure in order to explain the background of the crime of this case, and even if the crime of this case itself constitutes a public issue, it is difficult to recognize that the plaintiffs merely constitute a private person as the victim of the crime of this case, but does not constitute a public figure, and it does not constitute a legitimate object of public interest. Even if the disclosed matters are included in a legitimate public concern, such interest does not exceed the interests of the plaintiffs such as privacy and freedom of private life.

In addition, since the plaintiffs' home, photographs taken by the plaintiffs' △△△△△△△△, reading records, Nowon-gu's books, pictures, etc. that were published to the general public are not places or records open to the general public, it is highly worth protecting the plaintiffs' ordinary living relationship, and thereby, the damaged areas of the plaintiffs can be seen as belonging to a very secret area among their private life. The plaintiffs did not want to disclose them to others. In particular, in that the plaintiffs' sexual assault crimes such as the crime in this case and their family members were subject to the above report, it is very serious that the degree of damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to disclosure to the general public of society.

Furthermore, the photographic pictures taken by the Plaintiff at the △△△△△△ branch may be deemed to be the most confidential area among the private sector, and the disclosure of such pictures to the public by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff of the △△△△△ branch or the Plaintiff of the proposal, and the honoror shall be deemed to have been extremely avoided, and the disclosure of such pictures to the public through a report shall not be justified for any public interest purpose, in that such pictures were caused by sexual assault.

Therefore, the Defendant’s above portion of the report is not justified, since it infringes on the Plaintiffs’ personality rights, such as the Plaintiffs’ privacy and freedom, and in particular, the Plaintiff’s portrait rights of △△△△△.

4) Sub-decisions

Thus, the defendant cannot avoid tort liability against the plaintiffs who suffered from the news of this case and the news of this case and the news program of this case as to the privacy and freedom of privacy, and the result of infringement of portrait rights.

[A summary of the determination of whether each of the news of this case and the current events of this case constitutes defamation, the secrecy and freedom of privacy, and the infringement of portrait rights as follows]

1. Defamation 2. Infringement of privacy and freedom; 4. Details and scope of tort liability

A. As seen earlier, the Plaintiffs’ tort is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiffs suffered considerable mental distress due to the infringement of privacy, freedom, portrait rights, etc., and thus, the Defendant is obligated to raise monetary damages suffered by the Plaintiffs. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged in addition to the overall purport of each of the evidence admitted earlier, the amount of consolation money shall be determined at KRW 3,00,000, and KRW 21,000,000, and KRW 1,000,000, and KRW 1,000,000,000, respectively.

① At the time when the instant crime was committed by ○○○ had invaded upon the family house at a single night, the instant crime took place six years of age and attempted to murder the victim at a stroke and to conceal the crime at the bottom of the river bridge, leading the victim to stroke, strokeing him/her to death, leaving the scene, and committing an attempted crime. However, due to the crime, the victim suffered bodily or mental distress or the mental impulse suffered by his/her family members as a result of the crime.

A press organization needs to analyze and report the motive or consequence of a crime not only the progress or result of a crime but also the reason why such a cruel crime does not occur. It is inevitable for the victim to infringe on the privacy of the victim to a certain extent on the public-interest-based report. However, the crime of this case is a serious criminal act that cannot be justified for any reason, and the victim and his family members suffer a big shock. Thus, even if a report is made at a public-interest level, infringement on the private sector of the victim or his family members should be limited to the minimum necessary and unnecessary and excessive infringement is not allowed.

② 그런데 이 사건의 경우 피고는 원고들의 집 위치를 파악할 수 있는 외관을 조망한 영상뿐 아니라 그 내부의 흐트러진 모습이 훤히 들여다보이는 영상을 그대로 보도하였고 ( 영상 중 일부는 집 내부에 들어가 촬영된 것으로 보인다 ), 나아가 피해자의 개인 기록이라 할 수 있는 독서록, 노트, 그림 등을 촬영한 영상, 친구들과 함께 찍은 사진 등을 임의적으로 보도하였으며, 심지어는 범행으로 상해를 입은 피해자의 여러 신체부위 ( 얼굴, 배, 팔다리 등 ) 를 촬영한 사진까지도 자극적으로 보도함으로써, 공익적 범죄 보도 차원에서의 허용범위를 벗어나 피해자와 그 가족의 사적 영역을 불필요하고 과도하게 침해하였다. 또한, 보도 과정에서 어느 경우에도 정당화될 수 없는 이 사건 범죄의 원인 일부가 마치 피해자 측에 있다는 인상을 주기까지 하였다 .

③ However, each of the reports of this case was conducted in the process of coverage of the crime of this case without a prior review and analysis of the cause of the crime of this case, and was derived from the public interest purpose of preventing the recurrence of the same crime. At that time, only public interest or public interest has emerged, and such reporting is not likely to cause defamation or privacy infringement on the victim of the crime, and in the case of conflict of interest, where to what extent it should be reported, it seems that the report of this case should be made. Since each of the reports of this case, the report of this case was made voluntarily by a press organization, etc. from reflective consideration of such circumstances (○○ newspaper).

10. On December 17, 2012, the National Human Rights Commission of Korea and the Korea National Self-Governing Organization established a "working rule on sexual assault report" among media companies. Accordingly, the Defendant, as consolation money, has a duty to pay 3,00,000 won to the Plaintiff, ○○○, and △△△△△△, respectively, and 21,00,000 won to the Plaintiff, and △△△△△, respectively, and 1,00,000,000 won to the Plaintiff, and △△△, respectively, and 1,00,000,000,000 won to the Plaintiff, and each of the above money, at the request of the Plaintiffs after the date of tort, for the period from September 15, 2012 to 20% of the annual damages for delay calculated under the Civil Act, as the Plaintiffs so request.

B. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff was suffering from considerable mental distress due to the Defendant’s unlawful act that infringed on the privacy, freedom, portrait rights, etc., and as of the closing date of the pleadings in this case, the fact that each of the instant news was published in the news category among the Internet homepage operated by the Defendant is as seen earlier, and thus, the status of infringement on the Plaintiffs’ personality rights is still ongoing. In order to eliminate this, the Plaintiffs may file a claim against the Defendant for suspension of the said infringement (see, e.g., Article 764 of the Civil Act, Article 30(3) and (4) of the Act on Press Arbitration and Remedies, etc. for Damage Caused by Press Reports, etc., and Supreme Court Decision 2010Da60950, Mar. 28, 2013).

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to delete each news (the instant news No. 1, 2, 3, and 5 news) listed in the list Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5 of [Attachment 1], for which the illegality of the act of infringement among each of the instant news published on the pertinent website is so large that it is necessary to delete, and further, order the Defendant to pay indirect compulsory performance amount calculated at the rate of KRW 1,00,000 per day until the completion date of performance of the said obligation when the Defendant breached the said obligation with respect to the Defendant.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, each of the plaintiffs' claims against the defendant against the defendant is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and each of the remaining claims is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Jeon Soo-dae

Judge Lee Jin-hun

Judges Loyle

1) As to the instant crime, ○○○○ violated the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape, etc.) and the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes

half (Kidnapping and inducement) Except for the cases where part of the facts charged is modified due to the changes in indictment after being prosecuted due to crimes such as abduction and intrusion upon residence, the whole charges shall be paid.

The final appeal by ○○ on February 27, 2014 was dismissed, thereby making it known to the public for life and for ten years, and tracking locations for thirty years.

The judgment of ordering the attachment of electronic device and the pharmacologic treatment for five years was finalized (Seoul District Court 2012 High Court 2012 High Court 942, 2012 High Court 1164

(Consolidation), Jeon 2012, Jeon 26 (Joint) , 2013 Gaz. 1 (Joint), Gwangju High Court 2013No100, 2013 Gaz. 12 (Joint), 2013 Gaz. 2 (Joint), 2013 Gaz. 2 (Joint)

Court Decision 2013Do660, 2013Do 137, 2013Do 137, 2013Do 1 (Joint), Gwangju High Court 2013No387, 2013 No. 61 (Joint) and 2013

No. 3 (Consolidation), Supreme Court Decision 2013Do12301, Supreme Court Decision 252 (Consolidation), 2013 Do2013 (Joint) and 2 (Joint))

2) The main contents of the above news report rules, etc. are as shown in attached Form 8.

3) O News on August 31, 2012 20: 08 (No. 1 News of this case)

4) O News on August 31, 2012 20: 16 (New News No. 20)

5) O News on August 31, 2012 20: 13 (No. 3 News of this case)

6) 20 O News on September 1, 2012: 13 (No. 4 News of this case)

7) During the O News Re-Announcement, September 2, 2012: 20: 14 (New News No. 5)

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.