1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the Defendant’s motion to revoke the revocation of the ten-day suspension of attendance at the court on November 2, 2017 is dismissed.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff in 2015

3. 2. A person who entered a secondary high school and graduated on February 2, 2018, and the defendant shall be the head of the secondary high school.

B. C around October 2017, the Defendant reported the Plaintiff at the same time to school violence, such as coercion of games, compulsory purchase of items, verbal violence, and shoulderer, etc.

C. On October 18, 2017, the Defendant issued an emergency measure to suspend attendance against the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 17(4) of the Act on the Prevention of and Countermeasures against Violence (hereinafter “School Violence Prevention Act”). D.

The Autonomous Committee on Countermeasures against School Violence (hereinafter “Autonomous Committee”) was held on October 27, 2017 (hereinafter “the first autonomous committee”), and members of the autonomous committee have resolved to ratification of emergency measures for the suspension of attendance at the same time on an equal basis. The Plaintiff’s referral pointed out the problems of the method of notification (e.g. text and telephone) of the autonomous committee, and claimed the invalidation of the procedure, and decided to re-establish the autonomous committee in advance by notifying the chairperson in writing. E. The autonomous committee was re-established on November 1, 2017 (hereinafter “the second autonomous committee”); the Defendant “the Plaintiff’s Hahh from April 201, 207 to October 16, 2017”; the Defendant requested that the Plaintiff take measures such as suspension of attendance and replacement of classes for ten days, and the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the suspension of attendance on November 21, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 15 (including virtual number), Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Ex officio determination on the claim to revoke the ten-day notification of the suspension of attendance.

A. In light of the fact that the Defendant alleged the Plaintiff’s assertion violated the duty to explain when taking an emergency measure on October 18, 2017 and procedural defects, such as violation of the duty to explain, and the fact that he/she deviatess from and abused discretion, the above notification should be revoked as it is unlawful.

B. The evidence mentioned earlier, as well as the judgment.