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

A. The plaintiff B is the mother of the plaintiff A (F).

B. While Plaintiff A was in alliance with Defendant D, he/she became aware of pregnancy on January 2016, and Plaintiff A and Defendant D visited obstes who were operated by Defendant C in order to undergo abortion surgery (in her womb surgery) on March 2, 2016.

Plaintiff

A, as Defendant C did not have the grounds for permission under the Mother and Child Health Act, and refused abortion operation in violation of the law, it requested that the student is a pregnant woman who is a pregnant woman, and that it would not create a baby due to the preparation of test announcement.

Defendant C asked that the Plaintiff’s family members in Singapore and the Plaintiff’s family members cannot move to the Plaintiff.

In other words, the plaintiff's defect that the defendant C is required to do so humma and international currency refers to "I humma, which is known to hume, lost hume, which is changed by using a male-friendly phone." The defendant C, through the defendant D's mobile phone phone, asked the defendant E who requested the currency as if he was the mother of the plaintiff A through the defendant D's mobile phone, and asked the defendant E to promptly do so, and the defendant C, which is the same as now, requested the defendant C to promptly, and the defendant C entered the plaintiff's guardian's personal information and (the guarantor: B (11:40 p.m., with the consent of 11:40 p.m.)) and again asked the address and telephone number of the plaintiff, and the defendant E, who asked the name and child of the plaintiff C, stated that "I hume is too bad. The rest is known to A," and the defendant C, the name of the plaintiff, child, and child registration number of the plaintiff C, after the operation.

[Ground of Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul 1 through 3, the purport of whole pleadings]

2. The Parties’ assertion.