1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On March 8, 1982, the plaintiff was appointed as a teacher at D High School established and operated by D High School C, and the defendant was a person who served as the principal of the above school.

B. On May 21, 2014, the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition of dismissal from position for 60 days from May 22, 2014 to July 20, 2014, on the grounds of “the Plaintiff distributed false information to the school manager, such as the Defendant, etc., inciting students, thereby making a campaign to dismiss the Defendant and other school managers.”

C. On June 17, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an appeal review with the Appeal Commission for Teachers, who is dissatisfied with the above removal from position.

After that, on July 4, 2014, the school foundation C re-examineed the grounds for disciplinary action as set forth in the foregoing sub-paragraph (b) and issued a reprimand against the Plaintiff.

Accordingly, on July 22, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a request with the Appeal Commission for Teachers to revoke the said reprimand.

On October 15, 2014, the Appeal Commission for Teachers decided that “A school juristic person C is dismissed from position on May 21, 2014, and the Plaintiff’s request for revocation of reprimand as of July 22, 2014.”

E. Around 2011, the Defendant filed a complaint against the Plaintiff on the charge of violating the Personal Information Protection Act that “the Plaintiff received the supplementary class account books and allowances from D High School E, personal information, and the records of sexual impulse counseling by D and D, personal information, around early 2014.”

On August 31, 2015, the former District Prosecutors' Office (2015No. 4655) cannot be said to be a personal information manager of D High School's supplementary class account books and allowances payment details, and the information is not personal information that it has become aware of in the course of performing its duties.

E is not a personal information manager or a personal information handler with respect to sexual impulse counseling records, and it is difficult to view that the records were provided for profit or illegal purposes.

'The plaintiff's violation of the Personal Information Protection Act.