1. On October 29, 2015, the Defendant confirms that a transfer measure against the Plaintiff is invalid.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the victim student are students in the second year of the Nagoya High School operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant School”), and the measures taken by the principal of the Defendant also indicated as the measures taken by Defendant School for convenience.

B. On October 28, 2015, the Autonomous Committee on Countermeasures against School Violence (hereinafter “the instant autonomous committee”) opened a meeting of the Autonomous Committee on Countermeasures against School Violence, and it was difficult for the Plaintiff to take measures to prohibit transfer of the victim student to the Plaintiff during the course of talking that the Plaintiff lent the bus fee to the middle-class public officials during the school hours on August 21, 2015 (hereinafter “the Plaintiff’s school violence prevention act”). The Plaintiff first was able to take measures to prohibit transfer of the victim student to the Plaintiff, on the ground that the Plaintiff was able to take measures to prohibit transfer of the victim student at the first time during the first school class, and the victim was able to take measures to prevent transfer of the victim student to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the “school Violence Prevention Act”) and Article 17(1)1 and 2 of the Act on the Prevention of and Countermeasures against School Violence and Article 17(1)2 of the said Act, Article 8(1)2 of the said Act, and Article 97(1)2 of the said Act.

【Recognition of Fact-finding】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. In light of the fact that the fighting between the Plaintiff’s assertion and the victim was contingent, that the Plaintiff’s mistake was against the Plaintiff, and that the Plaintiff’s parent also gave 40 million won to the victim’s side, the instant transfer measure is too harsh and invalid beyond the scope of discretion.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

C. As seen earlier, determination is made.