A. The facts of recognition are co-owners sharing 2,341 m2, G forest land and 418 m2 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the instant forest”). The share in the instant forest is 36,496/109, 109, 362.15, 109, 362. 36,488/109, 109, 109,48/48/109, 36, 18/109, 18/48, 18, 13.85, 205, 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,00.

B. According to the above facts, H, the representative of the defendant, committed a tort that damages the forest of this case while performing his duties. Thus, the defendant is liable for compensating for damages suffered by the plaintiff, etc., who is the owner of the forest of this case. 2) The defendant alleged that he cut the trees of this case with the consent of the plaintiff, etc., but it is difficult to believe that the statement in Eul No. 4 was not sufficient to recognize that he consented to the cutting of trees of this case by the plaintiff, etc. on the sole basis of the statement in Eul No. 4.

In addition, other evidence presented by the defendant alone is insufficient to recognize the fact of the defendant's assertion, and evidence to recognize it otherwise.