logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.01.09 2013가단23894
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the D market, and Defendant C is the master director and director general of E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), a company that issues the D branch office located in the D branch office, and Defendant B is the inside-house director of E.

B. Defendant C jointly with F on May 7, 2013, annexed Form of “G”

1. The article as of May 7, 2013 (hereinafter “the article as of May 7, 2013”) was written, and the title “H” as of August 13, 2013 is attached thereto.

2. The article as of August 13, 2013 (hereinafter “the article as of August 13, 2013”) was written, and the Defendant B as “I” on April 16, 2013 attached hereto.

3. On April 16, 2013, the Roster (hereinafter “the instant Roster”) was drawn up, and E reported each of the above articles and the Roster.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 3, purport of whole pleading

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. Defendant C, the gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion, prepared and reported a malicious article against the Plaintiff on May 7, 2013 and August 13, 2013, on two occasions, Defendant C, who is the reporter belonging to E, has damaged the Plaintiff’s reputation. Defendant C, as the user of Defendant C, who is the reporter belonging to Defendant C, is liable for the damage of the Plaintiff’s reputation by preparing and reporting a malicious article against the Plaintiff. In addition, Defendant C, as the user of Defendant C, who is the reporter belonging to Defendant C, is liable for the damage of the Plaintiff. As such, Defendant C, who has damaged the Plaintiff’s reputation by preparing and reporting a malicious forum against the Plaintiff on April 16, 2013.

Therefore, the defendants are obligated to pay 50,000,000 won to each plaintiff.

B. The summary of the Defendants’ assertion is that the article of May 7, 2013, which was published on May 2013, 2013, cited the remarks of the representatives of civic groups related to the purpose of the public interest and did not impair the Plaintiff’s honor, and merely slander the Plaintiff for the public interest purpose, such as the right to know of D citizens.

arrow