1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s appeal against the principal lawsuit is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. The first instance court’s judgment dismissing both the Plaintiff’s principal lawsuit and the Defendant’s counterclaim, and only the Plaintiff appealed to the part of the claim against the Plaintiff, and the Defendant did not appeal. Therefore, the scope of the trial court’s judgment is limited to the part of the claim against the principal lawsuit of the first instance judgment.

2. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an attorney-at-law operating the Seo-gu Seoul Legal Office in Daejeon.

B. On June 2015, the Defendant’s spouse D used a mountain father and a hospital and a postnatal care center located in the Daejeon E, the Plaintiff’s death penalty. During the process of breastfeeding and discontinuance, disputes arose between the said hospital and the postnatal care center (hereinafter “instant dispute”).

C. In relation to the instant dispute, the Defendant was present at the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office on November 27, 2015, and was investigated by the Plaintiff. In that process, the Plaintiff was accused of the offense of insult (Article 6081 of the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office 2016 type No. 6081), and as a result of the investigation, on the ground that “the Plaintiff expressed a desire to the Defendant, but the performance was not satisfied.”

On the other hand, in relation to the dispute of this case, the plaintiff defended Eul who was the defendant in Daejeon District Court 2016 High Court case No. 2016 High Court case, and on August 24, 2016, the plaintiff asked D to the witness present as a witness on the trial date of the case at issue on August 24, 2016. In full consideration by the defense counsel, the plaintiff asked D to the effect that "I would ask only one of the witness who was a high level of fraud, or is forgotten only one of the two, or is forgotten only a day," and D filed a criminal complaint against the plaintiff as a crime of insult in court (Seoul District Court 2016No. 31284 at the jurisdiction of the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor's Office, the result of the investigation was found to have been examined by the plaintiff to D, but it appears in a mutual emotional state during the witness examination process.