1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs are those who were dismissed while serving as operational employees in Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”), and the Defendant works as the chief of the department in charge of the management of vessel vehicles and personnel in the instant company.

B. After the withdrawal of the company of this case, the Plaintiffs won the lawsuit claiming overdue wages against the company of this case by filing a claim for overdue wages with the company of this case under the Goyang-gu District Court Decision 2012Da34897, which was around 2012.

C. On September 2, 2013, the Defendant sent to each general team of the instant companies, including new transportation, etc., by facsimile the documents stating the Plaintiffs’ names and resident registration numbers, to the effect that, although the Defendant did not have committed any act by stealing the Plaintiffs’ official seal of the Korea Labor Agency and by deceiving the court, etc., the Defendant sent to each general team of the companies, including new transportation, etc., even though the Plaintiffs did not have committed any act by deceiving the court, etc., of using the official seal of the Korea Labor Agency.

Accordingly, the Defendant was indicted for defamation and violation of the Personal Information Protection Act, and was sentenced to two years of imprisonment on November 13, 2014 and the suspension of execution on June 19, 2015 by openly pointing out false facts, thereby impairing the reputation of the Plaintiffs, and providing a third party with such personal information without obtaining the consent of the Plaintiffs, and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for not less than six months and two years of suspension of execution at the appellate court.

(Reasons for Recognition) The fact that there is no dispute over the district court 2014No2793. [Ground for Recognition], the entry of Gap evidence 1 through 5, Eul evidence 1, the obvious fact in this court, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. According to the above facts of recognition, it is sufficiently recognized in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiffs suffered mental suffering due to the above illegal acts by the defendant, so the defendant is due to the illegal acts against the plaintiffs.