2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. (1) The Defendants asserted by the parties (1) as follows: (a) the Plaintiff suggested the way to pay the food expenses of the E Apartment Complex Center; and (b) the Plaintiffs were unlawfully expelled on September 30, 2016; (c) the Plaintiffs interfered with the monthly meeting of the Plaintiffs in the process of resolution for expulsion; (d) disseminated false information; and (e) posted a notice on the basis of false information that the Plaintiffs did not know, on September 30, 2016, to the above center for senior citizens for the first time; and (c) thereafter, Defendant C damaged the honor of the Plaintiff A while distributing the details of handling the 112 Report Report to its members on February 26, 2018.

(2) The order of expulsion of the plaintiffs in the Defendants E-House Centers was lawful pursuant to Article 4(5) of the former Regulations on the Management of Senior Citizens' Centers of the above senior citizens center, and the publication of a notice in accordance with such a resolution did not have the purpose of defamation and the public performance, and thus, the illegality is dismissed as it is for public interest

On the other hand, since the plaintiffs filed a criminal complaint against the defendant D as defamation, the complaint was revoked, and the six-month disciplinary action against the defendant C at the Seocho-gu branch of the F organization in the Goyang-gu branch of the F organization was reduced to two months, and the membership of the senior citizen center of the plaintiffs was returned to its original condition, there is no damage to the plaintiffs.

B. (1) In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Gap evidence Nos. 8, 10 through 22, Gap evidence Nos. 25 through 31, Gap evidence No. 37, 39, Gap evidence No. 40-1, 2, and Eul evidence No. 1 through 7, Article 4 of the "Operational Rules for the Elderly for the Aged", which was enforced from April 22, 2013 by the plaintiffs and E apartment-family senior citizen centers to which the defendants belong (hereinafter "the center of this case"), is a provision of the above Article 4 subparagraph 5 of the above Article 4.