1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

(a) The CBuilding Autonomous Management Committee is composed of sectional owners in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, an aggregate building, and manages C Building;

The Plaintiff is acting as the chairperson of the Cbuilding Autonomous Management Committee from February 2, 2011 to February 2015, and the Defendant is a sectional owner of C Building, who is a member of the C Building Area Management Committee.

B. From July 14, 2011 to the Plaintiff on several occasions, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a written request for retirement measures against E on the ground that the head of the Cbuilding management office E would have reached the retirement age as F students. However, on July 27, 201, the Cbuilding Steering Committee held a meeting on July 27, 201 and passed a resolution that “the head of the management office would not be an employee, and thus maintain the current retirement age regulations as it does not apply,” and the Plaintiff did not take retirement measures against E.

C. On February 28, 2013, the Defendant tried to distribute printed materials to the meeting place of the general meeting of the CBuilding Autonomous Management Committee, but the Plaintiff was prevented from taking away the Defendant’s hand.

After that, the Defendant filed a complaint against the Plaintiff on the suspicion of assault, stating that “the Plaintiff was fluored by the Defendant’s hand.” The Defendant filed a complaint against the Plaintiff on the charge of occupational breach of trust, stating that “the Plaintiff would inflict property damage on C building by paying monthly salary without withdrawing E.” and filed a complaint against the Plaintiff on the charge of occupational breach of trust.

The Plaintiff was under interrogation at an investigative agency for three days, but was subject to a disposition taken by a prosecutor in charge for the examination, and the Defendant filed each application for adjudication, but received each dismissal decision on September 6, 2013, and December 13, 2013.

(Seoul High Court 2013 already 2317, 2013 early 3378). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the plaintiff's assertion 1 was investigated by the defendant's assault complaint and the crime of occupational breach of trust, but was subject to a disposition of no suspicion, and the defendant's each.