1. The counterclaim Defendant: 1,00,000 won to the counterclaim and 5% per annum from October 24, 2016 to December 14, 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. The Counterclaim Plaintiff was a person who brought up the president of C Branching (hereinafter “instant Branching”) from around 1990 to 2010, and the Counterclaim Defendant was elected to the president of the instant Branching on May 3, 2016 and is performing the duties of the president.

B. On October 24, 2016, when the secretary general and the secretary general who had worked in the relocation executive office after the appointment of the president of the branch of this case requested retirement allowances from the counter-party Defendant, the counter-party Defendant: (a) demanded retirement allowances from the secretary general and the secretary general on the building owned by the branch of this case; (b) the former executive office attached a provisional attachment on the building owned by the branch of this case and paid membership fees to the members; and (c) there is no money accumulated by the former executive office, and there is evidence of corruption, such as embezzlement of public funds in the former executive office, etc., the members sent a notice to request the members to keep the branch of this case and the sub-branch of this case (hereinafter

The above notice includes the phrase “a branch office that has been sold in the future by the president of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch.”

C. On July 28, 2001, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on July 28, 2001 in the name of administrator E manager Co., Ltd., the reorganization company, E, and on July 31, 2001, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on March 22, 1999 in the name of the branch office of this case.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, 7 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts found in the facts of recognition as above, the branch office of the instant sub-branch appears to have purchased the instant sub-branch office from E, and the counter-defendant is a tort who defames the honor of the counter-resident by openly pointing out false facts by sending the instant sub-branch office to the members of the instant sub-branch office, including “A pre-branch office that had been sold to his or her father’s father’s father’s father’s father in the future and has achieved his or her father’s achievements.”