Daejeon Attorney | A Client Sued for Damages, Dismissal of the Plaintiff's Claim Achieved

2024.12.16김국일

The attorney defended a client who sought out a Daejeon law firm after being sued for damages. Through the attorney's defense, a judgment was obtained dismissing the plaintiff's claim in the client's case in its entirety.

1. The Client Who Sought Out the Daejeon Attorney

The client visited the firm's Daejeon office with a complaint, explaining that he had been sued for damages.

The client explained that the plaintiff had brought a claim against the client's wife for the return of a loan, and that a judgment had been entered in the plaintiff's favor, fully granting the plaintiff's claim.

The client explained that, while on the phone with the plaintiff, the plaintiff conveyed this information to him, and that, based on it, he provided a recording of the call to his wife.

The client's wife then filed an appeal and submitted the file in question.

The plaintiff argued that the client had committed a tort infringing the right to one's voice and privacy, and that he would have to bear liability for damages.

Saying that he did not know how to resolve this absurd situation, the client sought the attorney's assistance in defending against the lawsuit.

2. The Tort Alleged Against the Daejeon Attorney's Client

The plaintiff in the case filed a 🔗damages lawsuit and argued that the client had committed a tort and should bear liability for damages. Let us examine one by one the torts that the plaintiff alleged the client committed.

▲Supreme Court Judgment of October 13, 2006, 2004Da16280

Everyone has the right not to have their face or other physical features by which they can be socially recognized as a particular individual carelessly photographed or depicted, made public, or used for commercial purposes, and this right to one's likeness is a constitutionally guaranteed right under the first sentence of Article 10 of our Constitution.

▲Supreme Court Judgment of July 24, 1998, 96Da42789

In addition, Article 10 of the Constitution, together with Article 17, guarantees the secrecy and freedom of private life, and accordingly an individual has not only the passive right that their private activities not be infringed by others and that their private life not be carelessly disclosed, but also, in today's highly information-oriented modern society, the active right to autonomously control information about themselves.

Based on the above precedents, the plaintiff argued that recording the contents of a call in secret without the plaintiff's consent, replaying it, and preparing a transcript is, absent other circumstances, an act that unjustly infringes the right to one's voice and the secrecy and freedom of private life guaranteed by the Constitution.

In addition, the plaintiff argued that the contents of the voice information in the call between the plaintiff and the client, which should be protected as the right to one's voice, were disclosed without authorization as evidence in the civil lawsuit, so that matters concerning the plaintiff's private affairs became known to the general public, causing the plaintiff great mental suffering.

3. The Defense Mounted by the Daejeon Attorney for the Client

The attorney mounted the following defense in order to have the plaintiff's claim in the client's case dismissed.

Daejeon Attorney: “The Client Did Not Record the Call Intentionally”

The attorney emphasized that the client had not recorded the contents of the call intentionally.

As a sales representative who had to take calls with a great many people, the client had set an automatic call-recording function on his mobile phone.

The client did not record the call with the plaintiff in order to secure favorable evidence; the call was simply recorded by the automatic recording function.

Daejeon Attorney: “The Contents of the Call Did Not Concern Private Life”

The attorney emphasized that the contents of the call between the client and the plaintiff did not concern private life.

The client merely spoke with the plaintiff on behalf of his wife, who had been sued by the plaintiff over a loan, and discussed matters concerning the loan.

The client used the recording of the call only in his wife's loan lawsuit and did not leak it elsewhere at all.

The attorney argued that, because the contents of the call between the client and the plaintiff did not concern private life, the plaintiff's claim was without merit.

4. The Judgment Obtained for the Client by the Daejeon Attorney

After reviewing the facts of the case, the court rendered the following judgment in the client's case.

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff shall bear the litigation costs.

The client was unjustly at risk of having to pay 20 million won after being sued for damages by the plaintiff,

but the attorney, drawing on many years of experience, emphasized that the client bore no liability for damages and succeeded in having the plaintiff's claim dismissed in its entirety.

If you have been sued for damages, as in this case, it is important to prove that you bear no liability.

Because this may be difficult to handle on your own, it is recommended to obtain a Daejeon 🔗attorney referral and request a consultation.

This content is based on actual cases handled by Daeryun Law LLC and has been partially adapted. All copyrights belong to Daeryun Law LLC.
Unauthorized reproduction, copying or distribution may result in legal action under applicable laws.