logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.07.07 2019가단5048123
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B’s KRW 1.5 million and its related thereto from July 2, 2018, Defendant C’s KRW 2 million and its corresponding amount.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff is a distributor who operates the “J” of a company that sells cosmetics, health functional foods, etc. through web site K and Lone Star Program L.

[Grounds for recognition] The items of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to claims against Defendant B, C, D, E, F, G, and H

A. Defendant B, C, D, E, and F made comments on Internet articles as follows, and insult the Plaintiff, and Defendant G and H made comments on the Internet bulletin board as set out below, thereby insulting or impairing the Plaintiff’s reputation. As such, the Defendants are liable for compensating the Plaintiff for the damages caused by such comments.

B. Defamation, which is a tort under the Civil Act, refers to an act of infringing upon an objective evaluation of a human value, such as a person’s character, virtue, reputation, and credit, and so long as such an objective evaluation is infringed, it may be established by an expression of opinion or comment, inasmuch as the expression of opinion or comment cannot be deemed as impeding the other party’s social evaluation. However, in the case of pure opinion or comment that is not premised on a statement of fact, the liability for damages arising from defamation is not established. On the other hand, the expression of opinion or comment does not necessarily refer to cases where a fact is directly expressed, but rather to cases where a statement of fact is not limited to cases where a fact is directly expressed, but to cases where indirect or round-up expression is made, it is sufficient to find the existence of such fact in light of the overall purport of the expression, and thereby, it is likely to infringe on a specific person’

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Da6203 delivered on July 28, 2000). Also, the establishment of civil defamation ought to be objectively and objectively recognized to indicate facts that may undermine the victim’s external and social reputation.

arrow