www.humanrights.go.kr or her attorney’s help for habeas corpus not be violated. It also recommended that the local government in charge step up oversight of mental health care institutions under its jurisdiction and prevent a recurrence of similar incidents. E. ‌State institutions, local governments, and public service-related organizations ● Bullying of an employee at a local government Defendants 2, 3, and 4 had bullied the victim with continuous abusive language and unfair Department, XX District Office. The family of the victim brought this to the attention of the An investigation revealed that defendant 2, 3, and 4 had continuously bullied the victim with abusive language, while defendant 1 took no action to remedy it. The Commission determined that this violated the victim’s right to human dignity, i.e. the rights to personal liberty and the pursuit of happiness, guaranteed under Article 10 of the Constitution. Thus, on 29 September, the Commission recommended that the chief of the XX District Office institute measures to prevent a recurrence of bullying, which had been a consistent practice among the staff of the XX Department, and to organize in-service training of the relevant employees. ● Infringement of freedom of expression by public officials at a local government office The complainant is the representative of residents of XX Apartment in XX-dong, XX-gu. The XX local residents’alliance, of which she is a member, attended a recent meeting held by the XX District Office. On 14 March 2016, she produced a printout detailing discussions at the meeting for the residents in XX-dong and YY-dong, and placed the printout in their mailbox. However, many of the residents never received the printout. The CCTV feed showed that around 5:30 pm on the following day, two staff from the XX-dong Community Service Center entered the mailbox area and removed the printouts from the mailboxes without permission. The defendant claimed that the printouts were collected as evidence of defamation, but the 57 Commission's Major Activities management, but was ignored, so they filed a complaint to the Commission. Part II tasking, all under the connivance of defendant 1 who is the site manager of XX team, XX