Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant worked for the former C Cooperatives (hereinafter referred to as “C Cooperatives”) as the Plaintiff and the head of the division, respectively, and was a candidate for the election of the chief director of C Cooperatives that took place on February 24, 2018.

B. On March 18, 2019, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 2 million due to a violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (Defamation), as follows, in the case of resident stay support at the Daegu District Court 2019 high-level 164, and around that time, the said summary order became final and conclusive.

(2) On February 19, 2018, the Defendant’s act (hereinafter “the instant defamation”). Around February 14:10, 2018, the Defendant used the Internet text transmission website for the purpose of slandering the Plaintiff, who was going to the election of the president of the Cr. Cr., along with the Defendant’s home, using the Internet text transmission site, for the purpose of slandering the Plaintiff.

1. Purchasing (using the plaintiff) a golf course of 60 million won;

2. Econdo 150 million won (the plaintiff's family, relatives and children's children's children's children's children's children's children's children's children's children's children's children's children's children's children)

I would like to clarify any error so far.

The text message No. 1 is sent to 1,301 members of the C.C..

Accordingly, the defendant has damaged the plaintiff's reputation by divulging facts openly through information and communications networks with a view to slandering the plaintiff.

C. The defendant was elected in the election of the chief director of the above CUnion.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the allegations and the purport of the entire arguments and arguments, the Plaintiff could be recognized as having been suffering from considerable mental suffering due to the defamation of this case against many union members during the election process of the president of the Ccooperative. As such, the Defendant is the Plaintiff.