All
| TITLE | Supreme Court Decision 2022Da242649 Decided June 26, 2025 【Damages (Etc.)】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| 【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] Meaning of the term “defamation,” which is considered an unlawful act under the Civil Act Whether defamation can be constituted on the sole basis of the expression of a pure opinion per se (negative) and the standard of determining whether a certain expression corresponds to a public allegation of a fact or a statement of an opinion [2] Method of proving the falsity thereof, where the alleged facts are those not specified in terms of an unspecified time and location [3] Special circumstances to be considered in determining the illegality of the political assertion made by a political party in relation to defamation [4] In a case where Party A, a former member of the National Assembly, appeared on broadcast programs and, in relation to the suspicions that Party B, who had a personal relationship with the president at the time, may have concealed overseas assets and engaged in money laundering, made the following statements that “funds from a Korean company deposited in a Swiss secret account are connected to Party B,” and “Party B met with the chairperson of an American company and gained profit from it,” and, in response thereto, Party B filed a claim for damages against Party A, alleging that Party A defamed Party B by spreading false information, the case holding that even considering that the above statements were made as political assertions, the statements constituted the public allegation of false facts; there were no circumstances to see that Party A had reasonable grounds to believe that the details of the statement were true; and viewing that the statements correspond to malicious or significantly unreasonable attacks, and thus, the unlawfulness is negated is difficult; nevertheless, the lower court, which determined otherwise, erred and adversely affected the conclusion of judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine | |
