The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that produces and broadcasts “I” program as a terrestrial broadcasting company that broadcasts H-TV from April 1999 to September 2016. Defendant C, D, and E are PD that broadcasted on October 29, 2019 following I.

Defendant F is the representative and editor of “J” who acts on the Internet homepage, and Defendant G is the reporter who written articles of September 5, 2019 following J.

B. On October 29, 2019, Defendant B rendered a broadcast “M” (hereinafter “instant broadcast”) in the I Program.

C. On September 5, 2019, Defendant G drafted an article of N’s title (hereinafter “instant article”) and Defendant G posted the instant article on the J website and provided it on the Internet portal site, such as NAV.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2-1, Gap evidence 9, Gap evidence 9, the purport of whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion was prosecuted on February 23, 2015 by the main offender P, etc. of the OM manipulation case, and was detained on February 25, 2015, which was the completion of the investigation, and was appointed as the head of the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors’ Office as the head of the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors’ Office on February 25, 2015, and was not involved in the investigation of the OM manipulation case. The Plaintiff excluded R from the subject of investigation or did not cover the case such as embezzlement, and did not investigate as to the S attorney-at-law case.

However, the Defendants publicly stated the following false facts in the instant broadcast and the instant article.

Since Defendant B and Defendant F have suffered damages due to the instant broadcast and the instant news articles, they have a duty to make each of the correction reports as stated in attached Forms 1 and 2 pursuant to Article 14 of the Act on Press Arbitration and Remedies, etc. for Damage Caused by Press Reports (hereinafter “Act on Press Arbitration”).

(A) The Plaintiff is also subject to indirect enforcement on the corrective report. The Plaintiff’s broadcast 1 of this case is also subject to timely enforcement.