손해배상(기)
1. The defendant's appeal is all dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
3. Plaintiffs AH, AI, AJ, and K.
1. The reasons stated in this part are the same as the entry of the first instance court’s “1. Basic Facts” in the judgment, except for those written by the court as follows. Thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Part 3 of the decision of the first instance shall be referred to as "private person" in the third part of the decision of the first instance.
No. 10-11 of the 5th judgment of the first instance court, “Plaintiff I and the J shall be the leakages and children of Plaintiff A” shall be followed as follows.
“The deceased I and the Plaintiff J shall be the subject and dos of Plaintiff A. The deceased on March 9, 2015, and the Plaintiff AH, AI, AJ, and AK, who are his/her offspring, jointly inherited the deceased’s property, and took over the lawsuit at the trial.”
2. The reasoning for the court’s explanation in this part is as stated in the first instance judgment’s “the occurrence of liability for damages” is as follows, and thus, this part is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
The 7th 1-3 of the judgment of the first instance court stated that the defendant has extinguished the prescription period of the plaintiffs as follows. The defendant asserts that the above claim for damages by the plaintiffs was terminated by the prescription period of three or five years since the 1990s established by a democratic government."
3. The reasons stated in this part are as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following modifications. Thus, the scope of liability for damages is as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Part 10 of the judgment of the first instance court "I and J, who is a form of punishment," shall be applied to "I, who is a form of punishment, and against the plaintiff J".
The 11-5-12 of the first instance court ruling's decision "ma. Ha's theory".