손해배상(기)
1. All appeals by the plaintiff (appointed party) are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is that the reasoning of the judgment is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following modifications, thereby citing it as is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
[Revision] The portion in the first instance court's 4th page 7 is "," and "as amended," the first instance court's 7th page.
Part 7 of the decision of the first instance court shall be deleted from 7th to 9th.
The following contents are added to the “the person who entered the fourth sentence” of the first instance judgment.
Defendant B, C, and Defendant D, the parents of P, who are the parents of thisO, failed to perform their duty of protection and supervision as a person with parental authority over the persons with parental authority over Defendants B, C, and E, who are the parents of thisO.
Defendant F, etc. neglected to prevent the occurrence of the instant act in spite of his/her duty to protect and supervise the Appointor H while staying in the instant kindergarten, and did not prevent the occurrence of the instant act, as well as causing damage to the Plaintiff and the Appointor by committing the following illegal acts, and thus, the Plaintiff and the Appointor are liable to compensate the damages to the Plaintiff and the Appointor.” The head of Section 5 of the first instance judgment is deleted.
On the 6th decision of the first instance court, the following shall be added:
Considering that the instant act constitutes a tort as alleged by the Plaintiff, Defendant B and C asserted that this part of the Plaintiff’s right to claim compensation was extinguished by prescription. As such, Defendant B and C asserted that this part of the Plaintiff’s right to claim compensation for damages was extinguished by prescription, unless the said right is exercised for three years from the date on which the victim or his legal representative became aware of the damages and the perpetrator (Article 766(1) of the Civil Act). However, even if the Plaintiff’s assertion is based on the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff transferred the instant act to H on July 3, 2015, and Defendant B transferred the instant act from the designated person H as of July 3, 201.