The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2, this part of the grounds of appeal is to find facts by the court below as to the establishment of liability for damages.

The acknowledgement of facts and the cooking and evaluation of evidence, which form the basis thereof, are within the discretionary power of the fact-finding court unless they exceed the limit of the free evaluation of evidence.

In examining the record, the fact-finding by the court below is not recognized to have exceeded the scope of reasonable free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules.

In addition, the lower judgment did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the responsibility for the protection and supervision of teachers or the responsibility for employers, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations.

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 3, if the victim was negligent in the occurrence or expansion of damages, or there is a ground to limit the tortfeasor's liability, this shall be taken into account as a matter of course in determining the scope of liability for damages. However, the fact-finding or the ratio of comparative negligence or limitation of liability is within the exclusive authority of the fact-finding court unless it is deemed that it is considerably unreasonable

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da79947 Decided January 12, 2012). Examining the record in accordance with the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court’s fact-finding or its determination on the grounds for limitation of liability does not seem to be considerably unreasonable in light of the principle of equity.

There is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles on offsetting negligence or limitation of liability.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.