beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a former public official who served as B from November 19, 2014 to June 24, 2016, and the Defendant Korean economy is a press organization that operates a newspaper of “Korea Economy” and its Internet site (htp:/www.hwanyung.com) that is a daily newspaper, and Defendant Chosun Shipbuilding is a press organization that operates a newspaper of “clock boat” as a daily newspaper and its Internet site (htttp://www.ww. Sun.com).
B. After the retirement of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff was sent to the title “C”, and the record was written (hereinafter “the instant register”).
On November 1, 2016, the Plaintiff, at the same time, exchanged D reporters belonging to Defendant Chosun Shipbuilding, who were in a usual relationship with the Plaintiff, and divided the conversations on the direction of writing of the above scam, etc. on November 2, 2016. On November 2, 2016, the Plaintiff, a publishing-related person, together with the E, F, and scam of Korea-G reporters belonging to Defendant Korean economy, who had a usual relationship with the Plaintiff, divided the dialogue with the Plaintiff.
C. At the time, the said reporters prepared articles with the contents of the Plaintiff’s remarks, and the Defendant’s Korean economy reported each article listed in the attached Table 3 prepared by H and I G reporters (hereinafter “instant Korean economic article”), and Defendant Shipbuilding reported each article listed in the attached Table 4 prepared by the ID reporters.
(hereinafter “the article of this case” and “the article of this case” shall be referred to as “the article of this case”). [The grounds for recognition] No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 6 (including the number of branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4, 7, and 8, witness E, and G testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) indicated that the Plaintiff had an interview with the reporters belonging to the Defendants, “saves” or “saves”. However, the Plaintiff’s interview with the said reporters at the time is about the writing and publication of the register of the instant case.