beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay KRW 1,00,000 to the Plaintiff as well as KRW 5% per annum from C to February 16, 2016 and the next day.
Reasons
1. The Defendant posted the article in the attached list (hereinafter “instant notice”) in the title “D”, a website operated by C himself, as “E”.
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The facts indicated by the Defendant in the instant bulletin are false.
Since the plaintiff's honor was damaged, the defendant is obliged to pay consolation money to the plaintiff for damages caused by mental pain.
B. The plaintiff's honor cannot be deemed to have been damaged since the person related to the camping area, which was specified in the notice of this case by the defendant in this case, cannot be deemed to have been identified as the plaintiff.
3. Determination
A. In order to constitute a tort by defamation as to whether or not the object of defamation is specified, the victim must be identified, but the victim is not necessarily required to specify the name of the person, and even if a person’s name is not indicated, if it is possible to identify whose name is indicated in light of the surrounding circumstances and comprehensiveness of the contents of the expression, it shall be deemed that the victim was identified.
(See Supreme Court Decision 93Da36622 delivered on May 10, 1994). In light of the fact that the posting of this case refers to a person who talks about F, a person who uses a large number of people, and a person who uses a large number of people, and that the Plaintiff’s name is frequently expressed in the comments comments on the posting of this case, as acknowledged in full view of the overall purport of the pleading in subparagraphs 1 and 4, it can be said that a person who visits the Defendant’s Internet site, who visits the Defendant’s Internet site, was aware of, or could have easily known, the said expressions alone.
B. Examining the content of the instant bulletin as to whether it constitutes defamation, the fact that the Plaintiff refers to ① definition or advanced camping areas before the public is true.