1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. On April 18, 2014, the Plaintiff had an interview with general programming channel E in relation to the structure of the sinking accident of the Sewol ferry, and the interview was broadcasted on April 18, 2014, and the articles related to the Plaintiff were reported by several media organizations.

B. On April 18, 2014, at least 09:40, the Defendant written the Plaintiff’s comments (F) on the Plaintiff’s bulletin (hereinafter “instant bulletin”). The instant bulletin was made available to the public, and at least seven (7) visitors of the Plaintiff’s Kakao Scarto-ri (hereinafter “persons who written another comments against the Plaintiff following the Defendant) posted the instant bulletin.

C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff was indicted on the charge of impairing the honor of the Commissioner General of the Korea Coast Guard by openly pointing out false facts in relation to E and the above interview. However, on January 9, 2015, the Plaintiff was acquitted from the above branch court of the Gwangju District Court. The Prosecutor appealed to the Gwangju District Court 2015No200 and the indictment was modified, but the said court acquitted the Plaintiff on September 1, 2016.

On May 18, 2015, the Defendant was subject to a disposition of suspending prosecution by the Head Office of the Chang-won District Prosecutors' Office for the criminal facts that made the instant notice and publicly insulting the Plaintiff.

(Case Number: The fact that there is no dispute over the issue (applicable to recognition), Gap evidence Nos. 5, 6, 11, and 12, and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments at the District Prosecutors' Office in the original District Prosecutors' Office in 2015 (No. 5248).

2. According to the above facts of recognition of the liability for damages, the Defendant posted a notice in this case on the Plaintiff’s Kakao Scaro bulletin that enables an unspecified number of people to verify the contents of the notice, thereby undermining the Plaintiff’s social reputation, and thereby, committed an unlawful act of insulting the Plaintiff, which is caused by the Plaintiff.