1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that at around 11:00 on October 18, 2018, the Plaintiff resisted the D Apartment Complex of Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, the Defendants did not see the number of the fixed numbers and resist it without discrimination.

From the Defendants, they were subject to violence, insult, intimidation, and intimidation, during this process, Defendant B suffered a scarcity of a scarke wall that requires two-time medical treatment due to Defendant B’s drinking.

In addition, around 17:50 on October 19, 2018, the Plaintiff was insulting by Defendant C.

Therefore, the plaintiff has a damage claim of KRW 117,900, consolation money of KRW 10,000 against the defendants.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff asserted that Defendant B had sold the Plaintiff’s chest 7 to 8 times of drinking. If the Plaintiff, who was a female female in 1947, was sexually victimized by Defendant B, the Plaintiff would have received an examination and treatment, such as marking X-ray photographs, etc. A. The Plaintiff was treated at the hospital only after the following day, and was issued a medical certificate on October 24, 2018 and received a video diagnosis.

(A) The doctor of the written diagnosis states that “the content of the medical treatment and the opinion on the future medical treatment” should be stated in the column that “the commercial patient should not be inspected with the mark of X-ray, and only part of the patient should be stamped, and the damage to the cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage c

In addition, the apartment management director and the fixed number workers, etc., who were at the site of the plaintiff's assertion, have made a statement completely contradictory to the plaintiff's assertion to the purport that they failed to witness the defendants' assault.

(Evidence 3, 4). (c)

The Defendants received a disposition of no suspicion (Evidence Nos. 1 and 2) on July 26, 2019 (Evidence No. 1 and 2) in a case in which the Plaintiff filed a complaint due to the fact of injury, and the application for a ruling filed by the Plaintiff was dismissed on February 28, 2020.

(No. 6) d.

In light of this, the purport of witnessing the medical certificate submitted by the Plaintiff and the assault of the Defendants.