1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance regarding the plaintiff's claim against the defendant shall be revoked.

2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 20,000,000.

1. The reasoning for this part of the judgment of the court is as stated in Paragraph 1 of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and such reasoning is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. Even though the Plaintiff did not violate the Act on Origin Labeling, the former North Provincial Police Agency and the Gun Police Station, prior to the gist of the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff, as if the Plaintiff violated the Act on Origin Labeling, thereby publicly announcing the alleged violation of the Act on Origin Labeling, thereby causing damage to the Plaintiff as well as damage to the Plaintiff’s credit to the effect

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiff for damages equivalent to the reduced sales amount of 20,000,000 won and damages for delay as a matter of course or in addition to property.

3. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Article 751(1) of the Civil Act provides for the liability for damages other than property due to a tort. Damage other than property does not mean only a mental pain, but also includes any intangible damage which can be assessed by social norms. Thus, a person who has damaged a corporation’s reputation or credit is liable for damages other than property (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da37710, Nov. 10, 2005). The act that damages a corporation’s reputation or credit includes all acts that undermine the corporation’s social assessment to the extent that it may affect the corporation’s performance of its purpose business (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da53146, Oct. 9, 2008).

Judgment

The reasoning for this part is as follows: (a) the relevant part of the reasoning of the first instance judgment (Articles 6 through 11, 16) is the same as that of the relevant part of the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except that the “2013Do14191” of the first instance judgment No. 10 is deemed to be “2014Do14191” of the first instance judgment No. 10; and (b) therefore, (c) this part is cited

C. According to the theory of the resolution, the Jeonbuk Provincial Police Agency and the Gunsan Police Station are.