(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.05.15 2017나39281

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.05.15 2017나39281

손해배상(기)

Text

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.

Reasons

1. The facts subsequent to the facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by taking account of the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 6-1, and 2.

From 2007, the Plaintiff’s personal broadcasting (hereinafter “the instant broadcast”) is proceeding in the name of “D” (F) in the name of “F” from “Africa TV”, which is the Internet’s personal broadcasting site.

B. On July 16, 2013, Defendant B connected to the instant broadcast, posted the word “I” as “I” on the hosting hold that many unspecified viewers reported.

C. On July 16, 2013, Defendant C connected to the instant broadcast, posted a letter “L” to Ad'J and a conversation name “K,” which was reported by many unspecified viewers.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the facts of recognition as above, the broadcast of this case’s broadcast that allows an unspecified number of people to confirm the contents of this article, Defendant B posted a notice containing indecent language, Defendant C posted a notice that may reduce the Plaintiff’s social evaluation, and it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiff suffered emotional distress. Accordingly, the Defendants are liable to pay consolation money to the Plaintiff.

B. As to the scope of liability for damages and the amount of consolation money, the broadcast hosting of this case is a place where many people have consented to or opposed to the short sentence in real time, and the time during which the instant bulletin was exposed to viewers is relatively short, and thus, it seems that the possibility or influence of its dissemination is not significant. Considering the circumstances indicated in the argument of this case, such as the background of the posting of the instant bulletin, the degree of expression and the amount of amount of expression, it is reasonable to determine consolation money to be paid by the Defendants to the Plaintiff as KRW 100,000, respectively.

C. Sub-decisions.

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2018.05.15 2017나40496

-서울북부지방법원 2018.11.29 2018나33778

-서울북부지방법원 2018.04.12 2017가단133472

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.20 2017나54823

-서울북부지방법원 2018.10.17 2018나33877