1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

The plaintiff and E are students who were enrolled in the fourth and seventh grade of the D Middle School in 2017.

D. On July 17, 2017, the Autonomous Committee on Countermeasures against School Violence (hereinafter referred to as the “Autonomous Committee”) decided to take measures against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff and F, G, H, H, I, and J (hereinafter referred to as “aggress”) collectively taken part in E of victim students from May 2017 to July 2017, Article 17(1)1, 2, 4, 3, and 9 of the Act on the Prevention of and Countermeasures against School Violence (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) decided to take measures “the Plaintiff’s written apology against victim students, the prohibition of contact, intimidation, and retaliation against victim students, five days of community service, five days of special education, five days of special education, and three hours of special education of guardians.”

Accordingly, on July 18, 2017, the Defendant issued three-hours of written apologys, contact, intimidation and retaliation against the Plaintiff, five days of community service, five days of special education, five days of special education, and three hours of special education for guardians.

(hereinafter “Initial Disposition”). On July 21, 2017, the mother of E requested a reexamination to the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regional Committee for Countermeasures against School Violence (hereinafter “Local Committee”) pursuant to Article 17-2(1) of the former Act on the Prevention of and Countermeasures against Violence (amended by Act No. 15044, Nov. 28, 2017) for the cancellation of the resolution made by the autonomous committee against aggressor students, and the regional committee decided on August 24, 2017 to request the Defendant to add three persons including the Plaintiff to the suspension of attendance ten days for three persons, and five days for the remaining three persons to the suspension of attendance.

On September 21, 2017, the Plaintiff requested the Central Administrative Appeals Commission to revoke the above decision made by the Regional Committee against the Plaintiff, but was dismissed on April 3, 2018.

On April 19, 2018, the Defendant issued an additional disposition of 10 days for the suspension of attendance to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). The disposition in this case is a disposition in the entirety of the statements and arguments in Gap’s Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and Eul’s Evidence Nos. 8, 9, 12, and 16.