2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. The Plaintiff A is the mother of the deceased H, and the rest of the Plaintiffs are the siblings of the deceased.

The Defendants jointly operate a mutual bath called “I”.

B. Around 20:00 on December 7, 2013, H has been taking a bath at the above bath, which was dissleeped on the floor, and the head was shocked and used on the floor.

A bath manager, who has been contacted by other users, caused H to put H in the bath only, which is used in the bath, and returned to his/her h, and H was used again after diving.

C. A bath manager, who received contact from other users, contacted with 119 first aid units, and H transferred to a medical institution by the members of the rescue units dispatched, but was killed due to serious brain thale, acute thale, thale, and acute thale in the same day on the same day.

망인이 최초 미끄러져 목욕탕 바닥에 머리를 충격하게 된 것은, 목욕탕 바닥 대리석이 노후되어 미끄러운 상태였던 점, 다른 이용객들이 사용한 수건이 목욕탕 바닥에 방치되어 목욕탕 바닥에 비눗물이 묻어 있었던 점, 목욕탕 운영자인 피고들이 마찰력이 높은 욕실바닥재를 설치하거나 미끄럼 방지 패드를 부착하지 않은 점, 이용객에게 낙상에 대하여 주의를 환기하는 문구를 식별이 용이하게 부착하지 않은 점 때문이다.

E. Therefore, the Defendants are negligent in neglecting the installation and management of the bathing safety facilities, and thus, they are obligated to pay each money as stated in the claims to the Plaintiffs, the bereaved families of the deceased, for compensation for damages.

2. The fact that the judgment H has taken a bath to the “I” operated by the Defendants on the date and time of the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff died on the same day as the fact that it was used in a bath in the bath is without dispute between the parties.

The Plaintiff’s error in the installation and management of bath facilities causes the Defendants to dissleep the sleeped floor in a bath, thereby shocking their hair on the floor.