1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. (1) The Plaintiff posted 18 minutes video images of the same content as the attached Table 2 in the “B” as the title “B” to the “Steb.”

(2) On July 10, 2014, the Korea Communications Commission under Defendant’s control issued a request for the correction of blocking access to the instant video information to nine network operators, including KTT, who are providers of information and communications services, on the ground that the instant video constitutes “the content that substantially distorted historical facts related to the May 18 Democratization Movement and the content that promotes prejudice against the relevant group or individual,” based on Articles 6 subparag. 5 and 8 subparag. 3(f) of the Regulations on Deliberation of Information and Communications concerning Information and Communications (amended by Regulations No. 106 of the Korea Communications Commission, Jan. 9, 2014; hereinafter “Information and Communications Deliberation Regulations”).

(3) From July 11, 2014, the network operators prevented access to the instant video information upon the instant request for correction.

B. On October 27, 2014, C posted 28 comments as shown in attached Table 3 at each Internet address as indicated in attached Table 4 (hereinafter “the first bulletin”).

(2) On October 23, 2014, the Korea Communications Standards Commission (Korea Communications Standards Commission) rendered the said services to NAVA Co., Ltd.

For the reasons as set forth in paragraph (2) of this case, the first notice of this case was required to delete.

(3) On October 27, 2014, NAV Co., Ltd deleted the instant first notice after being closed to the public for 30 days from October 27, 2014.

C. On January 9, 2015, the Korea Communications Standards Commission: (1) issued a request for the deletion of a letter, the same as the attached Table 5, posted on the Internet site “Baber” (hereinafter “the second notice”), to the NAV Co., Ltd. on the same ground as the same on January 8, 2015.

(2) The NAVV Co., Ltd. is the second notice of this case.