Society in general : Society : News : The Hankyoreh

Regarding reporting (MBC) on the issue of the Rainbow Choir, which had paid participation fees while standing on the stage of the opening ceremony of the PyeongChang 2018 Winter Olympics, Kim Seong-hoe, who was the CEO at the time, filed a case sued for damages for reporting his face without a mosaic, claiming it “infringes portrait rights.” The decision of the Supreme Court came out that it was not one degree. The third division of the Supreme Court (presiding opinion Heung-gu Lee) overturned the lower court’s ruling in favor of Mr. Kim in the damages lawsuit against Cultural Broadcasting and sent the case back to the Seoul West District Court. The Supreme Court said, “(Mr. Kim) is a public figure who has made a name and face in many media as a multicultural expert and chairman of a support group for a certain politician, and a wide range of issues should allow for questions or doubts about (Mr. Kim’s) public activities.” it was deemed In 2022, Mr. Kim was appointed as the first secretary of multiculturalism in the Yoon Seok-yeol administration, but resigned voluntarily when he became a problem with various inappropriate comments such as comfort women. On March 3, 2018, Mr Kim took issue with the Cultural Broadcasting News Desk report. At the time, Cultural Broadcasting reported that the Rainbow Choir under the Korea Multicultural Center, led by Mr. Kim, asked parents to deposit 300,000 won while standing on the stage at the opening ceremony of the PyeongChang Winter Olympics. About 30 seconds of a scene where some parents visited the center and argued with Mr. Kim while protesting against this, but Mr Kim’s face was not mosaiced. Kim filed a lawsuit for damages of 40 million won, claiming that this report violated her portrait rights. The first trial court sided with Mr. Kim. The court ruled that “Munhwa Broadcasting violated Mr. Kim’s right to portray” and ordered him to pay 10 million won in alimony. The first trial said, “It was a case where the broadcast could adequately fulfill the public interest purpose as intended without infringing Mr.’s portrait rights. Kim.” The extent of the damage to Mr. Kim for infringing portrait rights outweighs the profit he is trying to gain from this report.” However, the Supreme Court held otherwise. The Supreme Court said, “(Mr. Kim) has made his name and face known to a number of media outlets, and through this, it can be seen that he acts as a public figure by directly or indirectly influencing society “A wide variety of issues should be allowed for this,” he said. In addition, based on the fact that the content of the cultural broadcasting report relates to the calculation and operation of the choir, he added, “It is in the public interest and a public discussion is needed.” On the other hand, regarding the rights of Mr. Kim’s portrait which was infringed by Cultural Broadcasting, “Mr. Kim revealed his face the day before (in the news) and held a counter-argument interview, and Mr. Kim’s name also appeared in the subtitles of the broadcast of’ this case.” It has been judged that there is little room to see that an additional negative perception of the manuscript has occurred because of this disclosure.” He also said, “Cultural Broadcasting does not appear to have orchestrated the broadcast by maliciously editing or distorting the video of this incident.” Previously, Mr Kim also filed a claim for damages of 20 million won against the parents who reported this video to a cultural broadcaster, but it was upheld as it was not appealed after losing the first trials and the second. Reporter Oh Yeon-seo loveletter@hani.co.kr