1. The Defendant is 5% per annum from September 26, 2015 to April 10, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is the head of C Elementary School, and the defendant is the chairperson of C Elementary School.

B. On May 18, 2015, the Plaintiff made a statement to the effect that “C seconds may be included in a small-scale school and may be included in the combination of schools,” at the model established after the DD District Voluntary Scholarship Council within five districts within the jurisdiction of the Office of Education, present with the Defendant. C second, the surrounding environment is good that it is good for the elderly convalescent hospital for the elderly.”

다. 피고는 C초 폐교와 노인요양병원 설립을 언급한 원고의 위 발언에 대하여 “폐교하고 노인요양병원이 웬말이냐! A 교장과 남편 E D교육장의 합작품인가 메르스급 막말 교장 A은 당장 C초를 떠나라!! 남편 E D교육장은 진실을 밝혀라!”라는 내용이 기재된 피켓을 들고, 2015. 8. 3. 09:30경 D교육청 앞길에서 약 15분간, 2015. 8. 4. 11:00경 및 2015. 8. 5. 14:00경 각 대전시교육청 정문 앞길에서 약 30분간 1인 시위를 하였다. 라.

The defendant was prosecuted as a crime of defamation in relation to the above one-person demonstration and was sentenced not guilty on the ground that "the above statement of the plaintiff was a matter of public interest" in the first instance court (Seoul Daejeon District Court 2016DaMa856), considering that the defendant's first instance court's "the defendant's first person demonstration was for the prevention of the defendant's private interest and the head's speech and behavior, not for the defendant's pursuit of private interest, and for the public interest, the first person demonstration was an institution related to the contents of the demonstration, the first person's place was an institution related to the demonstration, the plaintiff's suspicion against the husband's other than the above statement, and the plaintiff's emotional and hostile expressions against the plaintiff are within the scope that can be used under the social norms in order to form public opinion, it is hard to view that the illegality of the plaintiff's reputation is easily infringed on by the appellate court (Seoul District Court 2017No351).