1. The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The order of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be based on the Internet article in the attached list 1 and 2.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the representative of the F organization that is a member of the “D Religious Organization Victim Countermeasures Group” (hereinafter “E organization”), the victims of D Religious Organizations, and Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant B”) is a company for publishing online newspapers, etc., operates online newspaper “G” (H and hereinafter omitted address), and Defendant C is the reporter belonging to G.

B. The Defendants’ reporting of each article listed in the separate sheet 1 and 2 as shown in the separate sheet 1 and 2, as shown in the separate sheet 2, are as follows: (a) from April 14, 2014 through April 20, 2015 to April 20, 2015, 20 articles listed in the separate sheet 1 as “I”; (b) the articles listed in the separate sheet 2 as indicated in the separate sheet 1 as “instant articles”; (c) the articles listed in the separate sheet 2 as indicated in the separate sheet 1 as indicated in the separate sheet 1 and 2, and (d) the articles listed in the separate sheet 2 as listed in the separate sheet 1 and 10, and (e) the articles listed in the separate sheet 2 as listed in the separate sheet 1 and 10. However, the Plaintiff asserted that each article constitutes defamation, and claims a judgment in accordance with the separate sheet 1 and 2.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry in Gap's 1 through 13, 16 through 22, 34 through 37, and 44 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s act of reporting the instant article 1 on G website containing false facts, such as the Plaintiff’s assertion that himself/herself is a “reforest deposit,” thereby infringing the Plaintiff’s honor, portrait right, and reporting the instant article 2 containing an insulting expression against the Plaintiff, constitutes infringement on the Plaintiff’s personality right and portrait right.