beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition or dismissal as follows. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the
(2) The judgment of the court of first instance and the decision of the court of first instance are justifiable in light of the evidence No. 16-1 and No. 16-2 submitted by the plaintiff in this court, and there are no errors as alleged in the grounds for appeal by the plaintiff). 2. The second part of the judgment of the court of first instance added or height of the evidence No. 13, which was duly adopted and investigated by the court of first instance, is regarded as a "gold lease agreement".
The following shall be added between conduct 11 and 12 in the judgment of the first instance.
Article 751(1) of the Civil Act provides that a person who injures another person's body, liberty, or reputation or inflicts any other mental pain shall be liable to compensate for any damage other than a property. Damage other than a property shall not mean only mental pain, but also shall not be calculated in quantity, but shall include any intangible damage which can be assessed by social norms. Thus, a person who damages a corporation's reputation or credit shall be liable to compensate for any damage other than property (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da37710, Nov. 10, 2005). A corporation is not liable to compensate for any damage other than property to the corporation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da37710, Nov. 10, 2005). It is difficult to recognize the consolation money from its original meaning as compensation for such mental pain because it has no ability to cause any mental pain as a single abstract entity to affect the corporation's performance of its target business. However, a corporation's social reputation and credit may claim
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for consolation money for mental suffering is rejected, and it is not accepted.