logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.11.25 2015나33827
명예훼손에 따른 손해배상 청구
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserted that he was aware of the Defendant in a cartoon-related event, and that he found drinking water or gave gift to the Defendant in order to obtain the Defendant’s self-defense.

During that period, the Defendant demanded the Plaintiff to no longer find any longer, and the Plaintiff returned home.

Since then, the defendant threatened the defendant to harm the plaintiff's reputation on the Internet blog bulletin, the relevant notice was disseminated, thereby the plaintiff's honor was deteriorated, and the plaintiff was treated as a hospital with a depression.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff medical expenses of KRW 63,600, consolation money of KRW 6,896,400, and the plaintiff has the obligation to return the books in the attached list that the plaintiff donated to the defendant in order to obtain the defendant's subparagraphs and to return if it is impossible to return them.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the defendant participated in cartoons-related paints and cartoons, and among them, the plaintiff found the plaintiff who participated in the cartoon-related events several times, and the plaintiff found the defendant who participated in the cartoon-related events, and the defendant requested that the plaintiff no longer find the defendant or sent a letter to the plaintiff, but the defendant found the defendant or sent a letter to the plaintiff on February 23, 2013. The defendant posted a bulletin on the Internet log Nos. 1 and 3 (hereinafter "the notice of this case"). On June 2013, the plaintiff deleted the notice of this case upon request of the plaintiff for deletion, and the court dismissed the plaintiff's application for adjudication as to violation of the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (Defamation) and Information Protection (hereinafter "Act No. 1374, Apr. 1, 2013.

B. Determination 1.

arrow