2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On December 10, 2010, the Plaintiff received the support documents for faculty members at the above university, which was the invitation announcement of the professor recruitment with D of C University, and was appointed as a visiting professor with D of C University on December 27, 2010, following the procedures of interview with E, an honorary president of the above university.

B. The Plaintiff was serving until February 28, 2013 in the pertinent university and retired from the post. The Defendant is serving as the president of the C College D, and the F is serving as a professor of the said department.

C. On February 24, 2011, the Defendant sought E, an honorary president of C University, along with F.C.

At this point, the defendant concluded to the effect that "A's scenarios are not produced by itself. A's scenarios are companies which have been already closed down for a long time, and A has no record of holding office in the above company."

On the other hand, F stated that “A professor was divorced from A due to G hotel H. A professor and H are internal relations. At the time A professor and H were enrolled in a faculty training course prior to 10 years, H and A professor came from the hotel. The F said that “A professor’s good behavior is not neglected.”

However, in fact, the plaintiff worked for a long time in the Hanice Advertising Planning Co., Ltd., which is an advertising design company, and the scenario submitted at the time of teaching was also produced by the plaintiff, and the plaintiff was not subject to a divorce due to the H, but was not subject to a divorce due to the H, and there was no fact that H was present at the time of teaching training.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 11-2, Eul evidence 5, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 together with F on February 24, 2011 constitutes defamation or violation under the civil law that infringes on the Plaintiff’s rights and interests.

Therefore, the defendant, as a joint tortfeasor, is the plaintiff 3.3.