(2) In light of the following circumstances, the court below's finding of this part of the first instance court's finding of this case's facts and finding of this part of the compensation amount to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiffs on the ground that the defendant showed evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 submitted by the court of first instance. 2. The scope of compensation amount to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiffs on the ground that it is reasonable to determine the compensation amount to be paid by the defendant as KRW 3 million for the plaintiff Gap, KRW 500,000 for the plaintiff Eul, and KRW 50,000 for the plaintiff Eul and the defendant.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay damages for consolation money due to tort, KRW 3 million to Plaintiff A, KRW 500,000,000 for each of the above amounts and KRW 500,000 for each of the above amounts to Plaintiff B, and each of the above amounts to the extent that it is deemed reasonable to dispute as to the existence or scope of the Defendant’s performance obligation from December 31, 2016, for the Plaintiffs, from December 31, 2016, until August 9, 2018, which is the date the first instance judgment was rendered; for Plaintiff B, until May 16, 2019, from May 16, 2019, to pay damages for delay calculated at each of the rates of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which is the date following

3. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims are accepted within the scope of each of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as without merit. Since the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff was partially different and unfair, the defendant's appeal against the plaintiff A is partially accepted.