본문 바로가기 주메뉴로 바로가기
All
TITLE Supreme Court Order 2018Ma6721 Dated March 6, 2019【Objection to Provisional Disposition】 [full Text]
Summary
[1] Method of determining whether a film contains contents defaming a specific person
In the case of a commercial film based on a historical event, whether dramatizing historical facts is acceptable to an extent that does not reach the level of deliberate expression of malice (affirmative), and matters for consideration when determining the above
[2] Requirements and criteria for determining whether a film portraying an incident involving a deceased person constitutes defamation
[3] In a case where Party B, the father of Party A, a lieutenant who died in the Panmunjom Joint Security Area, petitioned for a provisional disposition against Party C, the company producing a film about the death of Party A, and Party D, the film screenwriter and director, seeking injunction of the production and release of the film by asserting that the film partly contained false information and was thus defamatory and infringed the personal rights of his son and himself, the Court affirming the lower judgment dismissing such petition on the grounds that explanation regarding preserved rights was insufficient and that preservation of rights could not be deemed as imperative
Prev 【Syllabus of Latest Opinion】Supreme Court Decision 2018Du60847 Decided March 14, 2019 【Revocation of Disposition Imposing Global Income Tax】
Next Supreme Court Decision 2018Do13382 Decided February 28, 2019【Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Injury by Mob Assault, Deadly Weapon, etc.) (Convicted Crime: Special Bodily Injury); Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Property Damage by Mob Assault, Deadly Weapon, etc.) (Convicted Crime: Special Property Damage); Violation of the Road Traffic Act (Driving under the Influence); Violation of the Road Traffic Act (Driving Without a License)】
219 Seocho-ro,Seocho-gu,Seoul 06590,Republic of Korea 02-3480-1100