1. The Defendant’s KRW 300,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from October 27, 2016 to September 21, 2017, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a teacher who was in the C Middle School located in the South-Namnam-gun, and the Defendant is a local newspaper company that published paper newspapers and online newspapers around the South-Namnam-gun area.

B. The Plaintiff, as a teacher of CmiddleD, was aware of the fact that part of the students are dissatisfied with E, one of the after-school classes, and verbal abuse and assault against the students of the relevant instructor. The Plaintiff knew of this fact and proposed a review of the appropriateness of E business, but did not take any particular measures, on July 7, 2016, the Plaintiff reported the instructor in charge to the police on the charge of child abuse.

C. The parents of G, who were selected as a student of child abuse, resisted the Plaintiff to the police without the principal’s instruction, and filed a civil petition to the effect that he/she requested the Plaintiff to move to the national newspaper.

Accordingly, there was a conflict between the Plaintiff and some parents who will maintain class, and eventually, the above school parents decided to refuse to attend school and did not send their children to the above school from October 24, 2016 to October 25, 2016.

On October 27, 2016, the Defendant prepared and posted the article indicated in attached Table 1 (Article 1) as the title “H” in the online newspaper, and the title “I” on November 1, 2016, respectively, as the title “H” (Article 2).

(hereinafter referred to as "each of the above articles of this case"). E.

On December 15, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for conciliation with the Press Arbitration Commission on the ground that the Plaintiff was defamationd due to each of the instant articles, and filed an application for conciliation of the content of the corrective report and damages with the Press Arbitration Commission. On December 27, 2016, the Press Arbitration Commission made a correction and counterargument statement in attached Form 3 to the Defendant.