(영문) 대전지방법원 2009.1.21.선고 2008가합5947 판결

The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff 200,000,000 won with 20% interest per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

The following facts may be acknowledged in the absence of dispute between the parties, or by integrating the whole purport of the pleadings in the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 1, 6, and 7:

A. The Plaintiff newspaper company is a press organization publishing ○○ newspaper, which is a daily newspaper with its head office in Daejeon. The Defendant newspaper company (hereinafter “Defendant company”) is an Internet newspaper company and Defendant branch director is a reporter belonging to the Defendant company.

나 . 소외 김소은 2001 . 1 . 경부터 2006 . 6 . 경까지 사이에 정보통신 ■■■■ 신문사 ’ 를 운영하다 2006 . 6 . 일자미상경부터 원고 신문사의 편집국에서 사회부 기자 ( 부국장 대우 ) 로 근무하였는데 , 2005 . 4 . 8 . 경부터 2006 . 6 . 27 . 경 사이에 국세청 , 경찰청 , 국회 의원 등을 통하여 세무조사를 무마시켜 주겠다는 등의 명목으로 수회에 걸쳐 6 , 970만 원의 금품을 수수하였다는 혐의로 2008 . 5 . 9 . 검거되었다 .

C. On May 15, 2008, Defendant Do○○○ published [Attachment 1] article (hereinafter “the article of this case”) of the [Attachment 1] article of the Daejeon District Police Agency on the basis of the news report document No. 1 of the Daejeon District Police Agency’s news report document No. 1, 2008. However, on the ground that the Plaintiff newspaper published the Plaintiff’s real name, Defendant Do○○ stated that the Plaintiff newspaper published the Plaintiff’s real name, and revised the Plaintiff newspaper’s name to [Attachment 2] article of the [Attachment 2] that was treated as the head writing.”

D. Meanwhile, Defendant Do○○ filed a criminal charge of defamation against the Plaintiff, but on October 31, 2008, he was subject to the disposition of “no suspicion for lack of evidence” on the ground of lack of evidence.

2. Parties’ assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff is responsible for compensating the damage caused by the illegal act, since the crime of Kim○-○ was done before the plaintiff's death in the plaintiff's newspaper company, although there is no relation with the plaintiff's newspaper company, the defendants acquired money and valuables by using the plaintiff's newspaper company as the plaintiff's death, and the plaintiff's reporter of a local newspaper, such as the plaintiff, published articles that slander the plaintiff's newspaper company with a false content that there are many cases where the reporter of the local newspaper company, such as the plaintiff, runs against the plaintiff's newspaper company.

B. The defendants' assertion

The Defendants: (a) drafted articles based on the report materials and coverage materials of the National Police Agency; (b) did not have any intent to impair the Plaintiff’s reputation and credit; and (c) carried the articles of this case solely from the public interest point of view to satisfy the people’s right to know; and (d) claimed to the effect that illegality is excluded.

3. Determination

A. Whether defamation is defamation

1) First, we examine whether the instant article is entirely false or false.

As to whether the crime of Kim Jong-chul was committed before the plaintiff company, it was considered that Kim Jong-tae was working in the newspaper company of the plaintiff from November 1, 2006 to November 1, 2006, and each statement in Gap evidence 5-1, 2 (Labor Contract and Pledge) that combines with the plaintiff's assertion was prepared at the same time as the conclusion of the labor contract, unlike the fact that the above evidence was prepared at the time of the conclusion of the labor contract, it was prepared on May 2, 2007 after the lapse of six months from November 1, 2006 to May 2, 2007. In light of Eul evidence No. 6, in light of the fact that it appears that Kim Jong-tae stated that he worked in the newspaper company of the plaintiff from around June 2006 to the plaintiff company, and there is no evidence to determine that it was a false one among the articles of this case among the articles of this case as the plaintiff's news article of this case.

In addition, among the article of this case, the nature of the article of this case as the 's 's 's 's 's 's 's 's '

D. The contents of the article of this case are the general trend that there is a large number of reporters who commit corruption among local newspaper reporters, such as distributing a large number of copies to the government offices only, and demanding advertisement acceptances or money and valuables on the basis of the source of public duties or corruption." The contents of the article of this case cannot be viewed as a false report against the plaintiff.

2) Next, we examine whether the Defendants posted the instant article as an article on the Internet newspaper operated by the Defendant Company constitutes defamation against the Plaintiff.

In order to establish defamation by news reports, a statement of specific facts must be made that may undermine the social evaluation of the victim. Here, the statement of facts is necessarily a statement of fact.

It is not limited to the case of direct expression, but even if it is based on indirect or indirect expression, it is sufficient to suggest the existence of such fact in light of the whole purport of the expression, and thereby, if there is a possibility of infringing on the social value or evaluation of a particular person.

With respect to this case, as seen earlier, the article of this case contains facts that constitute defamation against the plaintiff, on the ground that Kim mother (58) was a reporter of the plaintiff newspaper, and that he would be subject to tax investigation by the National Tax Service and National Assembly members, etc., on the ground that he was a reporter of the plaintiff newspaper, and that he would be subject to tax investigation through the National Tax Service and National Assembly members.

B. Whether illegality is denied

1) The general principles of law regarding the elimination of illegality of defamation

Whether an article of the press, such as a newspaper, impairs another person’s reputation or not shall be determined based on the overall appearance that the article pertains to its original purpose by comprehensively considering the objective content of the article, the ordinary meaning of the used words, and the connection method of phrases, etc. under the premise that the general readers contact the article’s overall purport. Furthermore, in the social trend that served as the background of the article in question, the meaning of the relevant expression should also be considered (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 9Da31356, Feb. 9, 199; 9Da6203, Jul. 28, 200; 200Da37524, 37531, Jan. 22, 2002).

However, even if an expression impairs another person’s reputation, it is deemed that the expression is unlawful if it is solely for the benefit of the general public. Here, “the purpose of the expression is solely for the benefit of the general public” means a statement of fact for the benefit of the public by objectively viewing the alleged fact and for the benefit of the public. If the principal purpose or motive of the actor is for the benefit of the public, it may be unreasonable even if it is published for another private interest purpose or motive of the actor. Further, if it is for the benefit of the public, it means a fact that conforms to the objective of the entire contents, and even if there is a little difference from the truth or exaggeration of the contents, it is unreasonable to determine whether the content of the report is 00, more than 20, more than 20, more than 20, more than 20,000, more than 20,000, more than 20,000,000, more than 20,000.

한편 , 언론 · 출판의 자유와 명예보호 사이의 한계를 설정함에 있어서는 표현된 내용 이 사적 ( 私的 ) 관계에 관한 것인가 공적 ( 公的 ) 관계에 관한 것인가에 따라 차이가 있는 바 , 당해 표현으로 인한 피해자가 공적인 존재인지 사적인 존재인지 , 그 표현이 공적인 관심 사안에 관한 것인지 순수한 사적인 영역에 속하는 사안에 관한 것인지 등에 따라 그 심사기준에 차이를 두어 공공적 · 사회적 의미가 있는 사안에 관한 표현의 경우에는 언론의 자유에 대한 제한이 완화되어야 한다 ( 대법원 2002 . 1 . 22 . 선고 2000다37524 , 37531 판결 , 대법원 2006 . 5 . 12 . 선고 2004다35199 판결 등 참조 ) . 특히 당해 표현이 언론사에 대한 것인 경우에는 , 언론사가 타인에 대한 비판자로서 언론의 자유를 누리 는 범위가 넓은 만큼 그에 대한 비판의 수인 ( 受忍 ) 범위 역시 넓어야 하고 , 언론사는 스스로 반박할 수 있는 매체를 가지고 있어서 이를 통하여 잘못된 정보로 인한 왜곡된 여론의 형성을 막을 수 있으며 , 일방 언론사의 인격권의 보장은 다른 한편 타방 언론 사의 언론자유를 제약하는 결과가 된다는 점을 감안하면 , 언론사에 대한 감시와 비판 기능은 그것이 악의적이거나 현저히 상당성을 잃은 공격이 아닌 한 쉽게 제한되어서는 아니 된다고 할 것이다 ( 대법원 2006 . 3 . 23 . 선고 2003다52142 판결 참조 ) .

2) Whether the instant article’s public interest is public interest

When the article of this case begins tax investigation against Kim-dong's subsidiaries, who are reporters belonging to the plaintiff newspaper company, it is to receive money and valuables from the relevant parties on several occasions through the National Tax Service, the National Police Agency, the National Assembly members, etc., and to offer and receive money and valuables by being employed as temporary public officials in large exhibition-affiliated organizations, etc. It is reasonable to view that the article of this case satisfies the people's right to know and constitutes the mission and role of the press, which is a social air (public organization). It was for the public interest such as sound criticism and supervision of the behavior of some reporters who committed criminal acts on the ground of the reporter.

3) Whether the authenticity or reasonableness of the instant article is true or reasonable

비록 피고들은 김소이 원고 신문사에 언제부터 근무하였는지를 원고 신문사에 확 인하는 등의 방법으로 사실관계를 확인하지 아니하였고 , 그에 따라 이 사건 기사를 읽 는 일반인이 피의자인 김모씨가 원고 신문사 기자임을 내세워 금품을 수수한 것으로 오인할 여지가 없지 아니하다 하더라도 , 피고들은 경찰청의 보도자료를 근거로 이 사 건 기사를 작성하였으며 , 위 보도자료에서 김소의 소속 신문사가 익명인 점을 제외 하고는 그 내용이 위 보도자료 내용과 일치하는 점 , 경찰청의 보도자료에 김소의 범 행 착수 당시 ■■■■ 신문사 ' 를 운영한 것으로 기재되어 있지 않고 ' ○○신문사 사 회부 기자 ' 로만 기재되어 있어 , 피고들로서는 김소이 범행 당시 원고 신문사 소속 기 자였던 것으로 오인할 여지가 있었던 점 , 정확성과 더불어 신속성을 생명으로 하는 언 론사의 속성상 경찰청의 위 보도자료 내용에도 불구하고 범행 당시 김소이 원고 신 문사 기자가 아닐 수 있음을 고려하여 김소이 원고 신문사에 언제부터 근무하였는지 에 대해서 확인할 주의의무가 있다고 보기 어려운 점 , 원고 신문사는 타인에 대한 비 판자로서 언론의 자유를 누리는 범위가 넓은 만큼 그에 대한 비판의 수인 ( 受忍 ) 범위 역시 일반인에 비해 넓어야 한다는 점 , 언론에 의해 보도가 된 이상 사후에 그 피해를 회복하는 것이 쉽지 않으나 , 반면에 현실적으로 언론에 대한 합리적인 통제 장치를 기 대하기 어려운 점 등에 비추어 언론사에 대한 감시와 비판 기능은 그것이 악의적이거 나 현저히 상당성을 잃은 공격이 아닌 한 쉽게 제한되어서는 아니 되는바 , 피고들의 이 사건 기사 게재행위가 원고 신문사에 대한 악의적이거나 현저히 상당성을 잃은 공 격이라고 볼 만한 증거가 없는 점 등에 비추어 , 피고들이 이 사건 기사의 내용을 진실 이라고 믿었고 , 또 그렇게 믿을만한 상당한 이유가 있었다고 봄이 상당하다 .

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.