1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. The Defendants were police officers, and each of the applications filed by the Daegu District Court No. 2014Ka-gu177, which was filed by D, another police officer, was filed with each of the applications for a lawsuit aid case.

The contents of the written application for coal prepared by Defendant B as of September 2, 2014 are as follows.

I have been working for E Team on February 20, 2014 at the Ansan Police Station.

However, while a civil petitioner is investigating a violation of the Public Interest Reporters Protection Act in accordance with the Act, the civil petitioner's assertion was intended to refer to the case that he/she handles by reviewing the case that D slope handled by him/her on the ground that "The Gyeonggi-gu Police Station D slope was in progress, the case was recognized as a crime, and there was a fact that the case was prosecuted and the case was reported about about 50 conditions of public interest."

At this time, it is known that D slope is in a difficult place to inform the civil petitioner of the contact information by good faith during the handling of the case.

Accordingly, I will make the main time and submit written applications to the extent that the error that was caused by the intention, not intentional, was broad to the extent that it was caused.

The contents of the written application for coal prepared by Defendant C as of September 2, 2014 are as follows.

I have been working for the Chuncheon Police Station E Team.

As of July 15, 2014 (Receipt Number: 2014-7408), I are receiving and dealing with civil petitions for violations of the Act on the Creation and Management of Industry.

The case that was distributed to the author did not carry out a tree disinfection by the disinfection-related disease control company, but directly by the apartment management office to confirm the facts of the case with the civil petitioner. The civil petitioner of the case stated that the case is "whether the reason for becoming aware of the case is known", and therefore, the civil petitioner of the case should not have filed a civil petition at the National Police Station.