손해배상(기)
Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff in relation to defendant E, which orders payment.
1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the statement of "1. Facts of recognition" among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it refers to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination as to the occurrence of liability for damages
A. According to the above facts finding that Defendant D and Defendant G’s liability for damages occurred, the acts described in subparagraphs 1 through 6, Defendant D and G’s 1-b are deemed to constitute tort against the Plaintiff respectively. Since it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiff suffered emotional distress, Defendant D and G have a duty to compensate the Plaintiff for emotional distress caused by such acts.
(Article 751(1)(b) of the Civil Act.
Although Defendant E and H’s liability for damages arises due to the minor’s ability to assume responsibility, if there is a proximate causal relation with the minor’s breach of duty of supervision, the supervisor is liable for damages as a general tortfeasor (Supreme Court Decision 2003Da5061 Decided March 28, 2003). (2) Whether the liability of Defendant E’s liability for damages is established or not, first, it was confirmed whether there was the history of assault, intimidation, or other misconduct of other persons even before Defendant D, but on the other hand, it was proved that Defendant E had been able to live in his/her own residence in Jeju-do on the ground that each of the records and arguments stated in subparagraphs 10, 1, 1, 2, 1, and 2 were mixed with Defendant D’s father L, his/her father, and from around August 207, 2007, he/she had changed his/her permanent residence from his/her own residence in Jeju-do.