beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff, E, and F (hereinafter referred to as “ordinary students”) are students who were enrolled in the same half of the year of D High School in 2018.
B. On June 8, 2018, the Autonomous Committee on Countermeasures against School Violence at D High Schools (hereinafter “instant autonomous committee”) held a meeting of the instant autonomous committee (hereinafter “instant meeting”) for the purpose of “handlings and other students’ handling of language violence and bullying among the Plaintiff and school life,” and decided to take measures against the Plaintiff in writing pursuant to Article 17(1)1 of the Act on the Prevention of and Countermeasures against School Violence (hereinafter “School Violence Prevention Act”), pursuant to Article 17(1)4, (3), and (9) of the School Violence Prevention Act, “five days of social service, six hours of special education, four hours of special education of guardians,” and “F pursuant to Article 17(1)4, (3), and (9) of the Act on the Prevention of and Countermeasures against School Violence (hereinafter “the Act on the Prevention of School Violence”).
Plaintiff
and the specific causes for each measure against the other students are as follows:
In the SNS SNS, the case where the counterpart students see the Plaintiff’s personal information spreading, verbal violence, and school life, and the case where the Plaintiff’s speech violence and language violence to E in character and SNS - The case where the Plaintiff was committed against the Plaintiff in the SNS - was found to have been aware of the fact that the Plaintiff’s humiliation and bullying against the Plaintiff was committed in the Mesa, which was close to the Plaintiff’s male sex gathering H, and that the Plaintiff’s humiliation and bullying against the Plaintiff was spread to the majority of the same half of the same contents that are not good for the Plaintiff. - F was confirmed by the Plaintiff’s Handphone lending the Plaintiff’s Handphone, and leaked the Plaintiff’s call to E, and was confirmed to have damaged the Plaintiff’s reputation by divulging it to a third party, and E was attributable to the Plaintiff.