1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants is revoked, and that part is against the Defendants.

1. Basic facts

A. From March 2013 to February 2014, the Plaintiff served as a dietitian of the E-high school located in Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

B. Defendant B is the director of the administrative office of the above school, Defendant C is the assistant principal of the above school, and Defendant D is the head of the administrative office of the above school.

C. The F, a teacher of the foregoing school, filed a complaint against Defendant B by insulting and defamationing him. On September 3, 2013, Defendant B rendered a summary order of KRW 2 million with respect to the foregoing case.

(Seoul Western District Court 2013 High Court 7742). D.

The plaintiff violated human rights in the above schools and filed a petition with the National Human Rights Commission of Korea, and the contents thereof are that the above defendant made an unfavorable statement to the above defendant in the above criminal case against defendant B, and thus the above defendant unfairly abused the plaintiff in school.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 12, 13, 14, and 15, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff made a unfavorable statement to Defendant B in the instant complaint against Defendant B, which was brought by F, and Defendant B, as a retaliation against this, committed an unlawful act, such as bullying between the employees.

Defendant C and D did not properly control and supervise Defendant B.

The Defendants committed a tort compelling the Plaintiff to withdraw a petition filed by the National Human Rights Commission of Korea.

The Defendants are liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the aforementioned tort.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the testimony and the overall purport of the testimony and argument of the witness F in the first instance trial, it is recognized that Defendant B made the statement to the purport that he would not directly associate to Defendant B, not the Plaintiff, in the event of difficulties among the above school cooks. Such circumstance alone does not lead to Defendant B’s tort liability against the Plaintiff, and the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone constituted the tort of the above contents asserted by the Plaintiff.