1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B is a person who was in office as the Vice Minister of Prime Minister from January 2009 to August 201, 2010, and Defendant C was in office as a performance fee of the former president at the time of the presidential election in 2008, and was in office as a secretary at the former president office from February 2013.

The Plaintiff is the president of the H Group, a main company, who had been in a de facto position to operate affiliates within the group around the period of the Defendants’ employment.

B. At I, the Plaintiff made the following remarks to the Defendants in the reporters’ conference at the Gangnam-gu Seoul OH Group Office and the interview with the media, etc., and such remarks were reported to a large number of media.

[Statement against Defendant B] From the Prime Minister’s office on May 2, 2009, he requested H Group to contact with Defendant B’s business trip. On May 22, 2009, H Group provided Defendant B with entertainment of KRW 4 million to KRW 5 million or KRW 5 million (hereinafter “Defendant B”) / [Statement against Defendant C] [round December 19, 2007, Defendant C was made by introducing loans from the NB before the presidential election day with the introduction of loans from the NB around December 19, 2007 (hereinafter “Defendant C”), and it was necessary to have his personnel personnel personnel personnel personnel personnel management for Cheong and Cheong, who is a party of the former president, and Defendant C et al., for gift vouchers KRW 2 million and KRW 3 million in total, KRW 5 million in gift certificates, KRW 3 million in total, KRW 2008, KRW 5 million in gift certificates, KRW 2000,000.

around November 208, 2008, at the Trade Promotion Meeting, Defendant C was aware of the Plaintiff and was placed in front of the Plaintiff, and was given an opportunity to return with the President (hereinafter “Defendant C’s third statement”).

C. The Defendants are also the Defendants.

On September 27, 201, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office reflects that there is no same fact as the plaintiff's statement in the paragraph.