2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. On April 18, 2014, the Plaintiff, the representative of the above apartment lessee, filed a complaint against Defendant C on the lease of the apartment site to the multilevel construction near Pyeongtaek-si apartment, and was injured by assault by Defendant C, such as leaving the apartment site. The Plaintiff filed a complaint with Defendant C, but Defendant B, the police officer in charge, filed a false investigation into his duties and received a non-prosecution disposition by Defendant C. Thus, the Defendants jointly and severally liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the Plaintiff’s damages caused by the said tort (i.e., medical expenses of KRW 825,00,000, KRW 1,750,000, KRW 3,000, KRW 600,000, such as the charge for document-certified mail delivery.

B. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 1 and 2, it is recognized that the Plaintiff suffered the instant injury on the wind that the Plaintiff was under the diagnosis of the Madern, tension, and tension (hereinafter “the instant injury”) from the Madern National Assembly members on April 18, 2014, and received the diagnosis of the Madern, tension, Madern, and tension (hereinafter “the instant injury”). On July 11, 2014, the Plaintiff said that the Plaintiff sustained the instant injury on the wind that was pushed down to the doctor of the Madern National Assembly on April 18, 2014.

However, the circumstances of the above injury are limited to the plaintiff's unilateral argument, and in full view of the overall purport of the statements and arguments in subparagraph 7-1, 2, and 3 of the evidence Nos. 7-2 and the whole purport of the arguments, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant C was subject to violence from the defendant C and filed a complaint for the crime of injury and assault against the defendant C. However, the prosecutor of the horizontal Housing Site Office of the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office on November 26, 2014, stating that "the plaintiff's assertion is insufficient, such as submission of false evidence prepared by the plaintiff, and it is not recognized that the defendant C was guilty of the crime according to the witness's testimony or video," and in light of this, the plaintiff was found to have committed a non-prosecution disposition against the defendant C