logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.05.19 2016나35817
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. From January 2007, the Plaintiff is proceeding with “Africa TV”, which is the Internet’s personal broadcasting website, to the NA’s “E” in the name “G” (hereinafter “the instant broadcast”).

B. On March 6, 2014, the Defendant posted the instant text “I”, “J”, “K”, “L”, and “M” (hereinafter referred to as “the instant text”).

C. The Plaintiff filed a complaint with the Defendant as an insult, and the Defendant was the first offender on December 10, 2015, and was subject to a disposition of suspension of indictment on the ground that he/she is a juvenile.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant alleged that he posted the instant text and insults the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the solatium amounting to KRW 5,000,000 and the damages for delay due to the tort.

B. According to the above facts, the Defendant posted this case’s text, which contains a language lower than that of the instant broadcast that enables an unspecified number of people to confirm the contents of the text, and insults the Plaintiff, in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiff suffered emotional distress, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay consolation money to the Plaintiff. Furthermore, as to the amount of consolation money, the Defendant was a middle student of 15 years of age at the time of posting this case’s letter. The Defendant posted a letter in favor of or opposition to the view that a large number of people in real time short of the time when the instant text was exposed to the viewers, and thus, it appears that the possibility or influence of its dissemination is not significant, taking into account various circumstances indicated in the argument of this case, such as the background leading up to the posting of this case’s text, the degree of expression and quantity of expression, etc.

arrow