beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an attorney-at-law operating the Seo-gu Seoul Legal Office in Daejeon.
B. On June 2015, the Defendant used the child care clinic, hospital, and postnatal care center located in the Daejeon E-gu, Daejeon E, which was operated by the Plaintiff’s scambman, among the parties of the said hospital and postnatal care center (hereinafter “instant dispute”) in the course of breastfeeding and discontinuance.
C. In relation to the instant dispute, around November 27, 2015, the Defendant’s husband F was present at the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office and was investigated. In that process, the Plaintiff was accused of insult as a crime of insult (Article 2016No. 6081 of the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office). As a result of the investigation, the Defendant’s criminal complaint was dismissed on May 3, 2016 on the ground that “the Plaintiff was deemed to have expressed a desire to F, but the performance was not satisfied.”
On the other hand, in relation to the dispute of this case, the plaintiff defensed D in Daejeon District Court 2016 High Court 2016 High Court 2016 High Court 356, and on August 24, 2016, the plaintiff asked the defendant who attended as a witness of the above case on the trial date of the case "I will ask only one of the defendant who is present. In full view of the defense counsel, I would like to ask the defendant about (hereinafter referred to as "serious") that the witness is a high level of fraud, or is forgotten only one of the two, or is forgotten only a day," and the defendant filed a criminal complaint against the plaintiff as a crime of insult in court (Seoul High Court 2016 High Court 2016 High Court Ma31284), but the investigation result "It is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff was examined as a witness to the defendant, but this was made in an emotional state during the examination process, and that the plaintiff was interfering with or threatened with the court's trial."
E. From March 29, 2017 to April 3, 2017, the Plaintiff filed against the Defendant and F with the Seoul Central District Court.