1. The Defendant’s measure against the Plaintiff on January 8, 2015 “a written apology against the victimized student” is invalid.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of Gap evidence 1, 2, and Eul evidence 6-11, 12 and all arguments.

In 2013, the Plaintiff and E were enrolled in the first year of the F High School operated by the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant School”), and the disposition of the principal of the Defendant is indicated as the disposition of the Defendant School for convenience of the disposition of the principal of the Defendant.

B. On December 29, 2014, the Defendant School opened a meeting of the Autonomous Committee on Countermeasures against School Violence (hereinafter “instant autonomous committee”), and made an act to the effect that the Plaintiff was “influence” several times in the second semester, and “influence” to E in 2014, the Defendant School made an act to the effect that such an act constitutes school violence as provided in the Act on the Prevention of and Countermeasures against School Violence (hereinafter “School Violence Prevention Act”), against the Plaintiff on the ground that such act constitutes school violence as provided in Article 17(1)1 of the School Violence Prevention Act (hereinafter “School Violence Prevention Act”). On January 8, 2015, the Plaintiff issued a written apology against the victimized student” (hereinafter “instant measure”).

2. The details of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes are as shown in attached statutes;

3. The instant measure, which causes the Plaintiff’s claim, is null and void due to the following procedural defect.

The instant measure is in accordance with the resolution of the instant autonomous committee meeting. Since the instant autonomous committee was commissioned as a representative of parents who was not legally elected, the organization of the committee was unlawful. Police Officers, who were not members, participated in the meeting without any ground and led the deliberation and resolution. The Plaintiff was not given specific notice of the reason corresponding to school violence and was not given sufficient opportunity for explanation during the deliberation and resolution, and was also denied the right to receive counsel’s assistance.

B. The reason for the instant measure is that the Defendant School is a substantive defect.