2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The plaintiffs asserted that the defendants jointly have a duty to compensate the plaintiffs for damages caused by tort on the following grounds:

① Defendant 5 posted false facts on the Internet or informed Defendant 3 and 4 of the fact that “A child was sexually abused by the Plaintiff’s teacher, etc., as well as was sexually abused by the Plaintiff’s teacher, etc., and the Plaintiff’s kindergarten was physically punished.”

(hereinafter “the instant information”). ② Defendant 3 and 4 did not take all measures such as official interview or investigation process with the Plaintiff kindergarten, and prepared the first article on the basis of Defendant 5’s unilateral statement and conversation between Defendant 5 and I, citing the said false information as they were actually punished, and Defendant 2 made a decision on the report.

③ In addition, on March 25, 2015, the Defendants issued the follow-up articles of this case, thereby promoting the expansion and reproduction of false facts discovered as the first engineer.

④ Such joint tort committed by the Defendants led to damage to the reputation and social evaluation of the Plaintiffs, and a large number of originals who have brought about apprehensions, thereby causing property damage to the Plaintiff’s kindergarten. As such, the Defendants are jointly liable to compensate for damage to the Plaintiff’s kindergarten’s property and social evaluation and damage, and for the emotional distress of the Plaintiff B.

B. The Plaintiffs who need to determine whether the Plaintiff’s kindergarten has a party capacity are the party capacity.