1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Facts of recognition

The Plaintiff and the Defendant were members of the “C” scheme.

Defendant (E) posted on the said carpet bulletin board “G” on December 10, 2015 and posted the comments (hereinafter “the comments No. 1 of this case”) as follows: (a) on December 10, 2015.

D On December 12, 2015, around 01:22, the Defendant again posted the following comments (hereinafter “instant 2 comments”) to the Plaintiff’s comments expressing the content of the instant 1 comments.

[B] D] Do (based on recognition), there is no dispute, and the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the grounds for the claim as stated in Gap’s Nos. 1 and 4 is sufficient to cause specific misunderstanding that the Plaintiff committed a sexual indecent act at the Busan gathering in the context before and after the foregoing, and thus seriously damages the Plaintiff’s honor, and the comments No. 2 comments of this case constitute insult of the Plaintiff.

The plaintiff suffered a token with the above comments given by the defendant, and the defendant who prepared the comments of this case is obligated to pay consolation money of five million won to the plaintiff.

Judgment

Defamation, which is a tort under the Civil Act, in determining whether the comments No. 1 of this case damaged the Plaintiff’s reputation, refers to an act of infringing upon the social objective evaluation of personal values, such as character, morals, reputation, credit, etc. by publicly expressing facts.

Of course, an expressive act that explicitly expresses a certain fact to the extent that it is likely to infringe on another person’s social assessment may constitute defamation. However, an expressive act that expresses an opinion or comment may constitute defamation if it explicitly includes an assertion about the hidden basic fact that serves as the basis for an opinion in light of the overall purport thereof, and if such fact may infringe on another person’s social assessment, such expressive act may constitute defamation.

The first comments on this case are made.