(Approved by the Judicial Committee of the Supreme People's Court on October 9, 2020)

　　keyword  Civil/Reputation rights/Network infringement/wechat group/Public space

　　Points of judgment

　　1. To determine that the speech in the wechat group constitutes an infringement of the reputation right of others, it should conform to all the constituent elements of the reputation right infringement, and should also consider the characteristics of information network communication and make a comprehensive judgment in combination with specific factors such as the subject of infringement, the scope of transmission and the degree of damage。

　　2. Wechat groups composed of non-specific parties have the property of public space, and citizens Posting insulting, defamatory, slanderous or derogatory remarks to others in such wechat groups constitute infringement of reputation right and shall bear legal responsibility according to law。

　　Relevant law

　　1. General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China, Articles 101 and 120

　　2. Article 6, 20, and 22 of the Tort Liability Law of the People's Republic of China

　　Basic case

　　The plaintiff Beijing Lanshida Photoelectric Technology Co., LTD. (hereinafter referred to as Lanshida Company) and Huang Xiaolan sued that Huang Xiaolan was an employee of Lanshida Company and engaged in the machine beauty nail art business。Since January 17, 2017，The defendant Zhao Min has been fabricating, defaming and framing the two plaintiffs，Repeatedly slander, abuse，Said Huang Xiaolan has schizophrenia，Slander Lanshida company's instruments are irregular and blackmail customers，And spread through wechat groups and other ways，Causing serious damage to the plaintiff's reputation，Loss of business，Request the people's Court to order: 1. The defendant apologizes to the two plaintiffs，And remove the impact and restore the reputation of the plaintiff by Posting a notice in No. X, Shunyi District, Beijing, or by publishing a notice in a local newspaper in Beijing;2. Compensate the plaintiff Lanshida Company for the loss of 20,000 yuan;Three, compensation two plaintiffs mental damage compensation of 5,000 yuan each。

　　Defendant Zhao Min argued that the defendant did not send information that damaged the plaintiff's reputation in the wechat group of the community, and only told neighbors and good friends about the dispute with the two plaintiffs, and the matter had a greater impact on the defendant。Lanshida Company instruments are irregular, blackmail customers non-defendants believe that others also feel the same。The plaintiff's beauty shop is often closed, and its loss has nothing to do with the defendant。It is therefore requested that the plaintiff's claim be dismissed。

　　The court found out after hearing: Lanshida company in Beijing Shunyi District, a residential area on the first floor of a beauty shop, Huang Xiaolan is a shareholder of the company concurrently beautician。At 16:00 on January 17, 2017, Zhao Min accompanied another owner of the residential area to the beauty shop to do beauty。Huang Xiaolan for customers to do beauty, Zhao Min asked before it in the beauty shop freckle things, after two people because of beauty service problems spat。Later, the public security department made a decision on administrative punishment for Zhao Min, giving Zhao Min a punishment of three days of administrative detention。

　　The plaintiff Zhang Zhaomin's wechat nickname is X Jun (wechat ID x-calm).，And the community owner wechat group owner，After the dispute between the two parties, Zhao Min repeatedly made rumors, slander, slander and abuse against the two plaintiffs in the owner's wechat group，And remove Huang Xiaolan from the group of owners，Lanshida company because of Zhao Min's behavior business was seriously damaged。The plaintiff provided wechat chat records and Zhang's witness testimony to prove it。The wechat chat logs come from two wechat groups，The numbers were 345 and 123, respectively，Recorded nickname X county sent about Huang Xiaolan, LAN Shida company's remarks，And other group members to inquire about the response information;Witness Zhang is a customer of Lanshida Company，Also a community owner，He came to court to state the contents of the wechat group he saw and presented his mobile phone wechat in court，The main wechat ID of the group is X-calm。

　　Zhao Min did not recognize the plaintiff's statement and evidence，He also said that he did laser freckle removal in the beauty shop involved in the lawsuit in 2016，Huang Xiaolan promised to guarantee all removed，But after doing it twice，Plaques get worse，Multiple communication，The other party did not agree to a refund，He consulted again on the day of the incident，Huang Xiaolan denied Zhao Min in this done freckle，An altercation occurs between the two parties;Zhao Min has only one wechat account，They change their names frequently，Now the owner group is called X Fruit，I am not the master of the group，Not clear about the group owner，Did not add Huang Xiaolan as a friend，Nor did he send any information damaging the plaintiff's reputation in the wechat group，Only to neighbors and friends about the dispute with the plaintiff，Lanshida company instruments are irregular and blackmail customers，Others feel the same way，Citizens have freedom of speech。

　　Upon the plaintiff's application, the court obtained the real-name authentication information of wechat X-CALM from Shenzhen Tencent Computer System Co., LTD., confirming Zhao Min, and confirmed that the wechat signal and Huang Xiaolan's wechat X-HL were friends at 13:16:18 on March 4, 2016。Zhao Min recognized this, but said that the information about Huang Xiaolan and LAN Shida company sent in the wechat group was not clear, and now the wechat signal was no longer used, and one of the owner groups was withdrawn。

　　verdict

　　Beijing Shunyi District People's Court made (2017) Beijing 0113 Civil Judgment No. 5491 at the beginning of the Republic of China on September 19, 2017:1. Defendant Zhao Min posted an apology statement at the door of X House in Shunyi District within seven days from the date of the effective of this judgment，Apologize to plaintiff Huang Xiaolan and Beijing Lanshida Optoelectronic Technology Co., LTD，Posted for seven days，The content of the apology must be reviewed by the court;If the above contents are not implemented within the time limit，The Court shall post the full text of this judgment at the door of the above address;(2) The defendant Zhao Min shall compensate the plaintiff Beijing Lanshida Optoelectronic Technology Co., Ltd. for the economic loss of 3,000 yuan within seven days from the effective date of this judgment;3. The defendant Zhao Min shall compensate the plaintiff Huang Xiaolan 2,000 yuan for mental damage within seven days from the effective date of this judgment;4. Reject other claims of plaintiff Huang Xiaolan and Beijing Lanshida Optoelectronic Technology Co., LTD。After the verdict, Zhao filed an appeal。On January 31, 2018, the Third Intermediate People's Court of Beijing made civil judgment No. 725 of (2018) Beijing 03 Min End: The appeal was rejected and the original judgment was upheld。

　　Reason for judgment

　　The effective judgment of the court holds that the right of reputation is the right of the civil subject to protect his own reputation and exclude the infringement of others。Civil subjects include not only natural persons, but also legal persons and other organizations。Article 101 of the General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that citizens and legal persons enjoy the right of reputation, that the personal dignity of citizens shall be protected by law, and that it is prohibited to damage the reputation of citizens and legal persons by means of insult or slander。

　　The focus of the dispute in this case is whether the defendant Zhao Min's remarks in the wechat group against the plaintiff Huang Xiaolan and LAN Shida Company constitute an infringement of reputation rights。The traditional infringement of reputation right has four elements, namely, the fact that the victim's reputation is indeed damaged, the act of the perpetrator is illegal, the causal relationship between the illegal act and the damage result, and the perpetrator is subjectively wrong。For the determination of whether the speech in the wechat group infringes the reputation right of others, it should conform to all the components of the traditional reputation right infringement, and should also consider the characteristics of information network communication and combine the specific factors such as the subject of infringement, the scope of communication and the degree of damage to make a comprehensive judgment。

　　In this case, Zhao Min denied that the information about the case sent by his wechat account X-Calm was his own, but he did not provide evidence to prove it, and it was inconsistent with the established facts, so the court could not adopt the defense opinion。Find out from the trial，Combined with wechat chat records, witness testimony, the court from Shenzhen Tencent Computer System Co., LTD，It can be determined that Zhao Min after the dispute with Huang Xiaolan，Through the wechat account of two owners of the community where the two sides live together, the information released by the wechat group used "stupid X", "stinking stupid X", "schizophrenic", "pretending to be crazy and stupid" and other obviously insulting words，And used Huang Xiaolan's photo as the illustration，For Lanshida company's "irregular beauticians", "blackmail customers", "broken instruments", "technology and products are not working" and other derogatory words，Zhao Min did not submit evidence to prove the objective truth of his statements;To say the least，Even when the facts are relevant，It should also be resolved through legal means。Zhao Min sent the inappropriate remarks to two wechat groups with many residents of the community，Its subjective fault is obvious，From the composition of wechat group members, inquiries to other members and the convenience, wide, fast and other characteristics of network information dissemination，The remarks involved in the case are indeed easy to cause speculation and misunderstanding of the beauty shop operated by Huang Xiaolan and LAN Shida company，Damage to the community public's trust in Lanshida company，The negative perception of the two causes the social evaluation of Huang Xiaolan and Lanshida's products or services to be reduced，There is a causal relationship between Zhao Min's damaging behavior and the reputation of Huang Xiaolan and LAN Shida，Therefore, Zhao Min's behavior meets the requirements of violating the right of reputation，Constituted infringement。

　　If a perpetrator infringes upon the civil rights and interests of another person through his fault, he shall bear tort liability。Wechat groups composed of non-specific parties have the property of public space, and citizens Posting insulting, defamatory, slanderous or derogatory remarks to others in such wechat groups constitute infringement of reputation right and shall bear legal responsibility according to law。A citizen or legal person whose right of reputation has been infringed upon shall have the right to demand cessation of the infringement, restoration of reputation, elimination of the impact, offering an apology, and may demand compensation for the loss。Now Huang Xiaolan and Lanshida company require Zhao Min to apologize based on the violation of the right of reputation, which is in line with the law and should be supported, and the specific way of apology is determined at the discretion of the court。About the economic losses caused by the infringement of the reputation right of Lanshida Company，The evidence provided by Landsda cannot prove the actual amount of economic loss，However, Lanshida company operates a beauty shop in the community involved in the lawsuit，Zhao Min's improper remarks in the wechat group with many residents of the community are bound to have an adverse impact on the operation of Lanshida Company，Therefore, the request to Lanshida company，Take into account the extent of Zhao Min's fault, the content and impact of the infringement, the duration of the infringement, the actual business situation of Lanshida Company and other factors as appropriate。As for the compensation for mental damage claimed by Huang Xiaolan, the specific amount is also determined according to the above factors。As for the compensation for mental damage advocated by Lanshida Company, it lacks legal basis, so it is not supported。

　　(Effective judges: Ba Jingyan, Li Miao, Xu Chen)