1. Each of the plaintiffs' claims is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 11, 2018, Plaintiff A (D) suffered from the injury to the left-hand sloping sckes, the top-hand scke, the sckele of which was the top-hand scke during the E-middle sckeing hours.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). (b)

Plaintiff

A On September 20, 2018, the F Hospital was performing a set of satisfy at the center of the left-hand bank (hereinafter “instant operation”).

C. The instant accident constitutes a school safety accident as prescribed by the Act on the Prevention of and Compensation for Accidents at School (hereinafter “School Safety Accident Compensation Act”) due to an accident that occurred during educational activities in a school playground.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment

A. Since the accident of this case caused the plaintiff A to suffer from a chronic disability due to the main purport of the plaintiffs' assertion, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff A a total of KRW 29 million in total, and KRW 29 million in compensation for the aftermath disability as disability benefits, and KRW 3 million in compensation for the aftermath disability.

In addition, the plaintiff Eul was the father of the plaintiff Eul and suffered from mental suffering due to the plaintiff Eul's aftermath disorder, and the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff Eul a consolation money of 1.5 million won and damages for delay.

B. The instant accident No. 1 constitutes a school safety accident under the School Safety Accident Compensation Act, and if the Plaintiff’s remaining disability occurred due to the instant accident, the Defendant is liable to pay disability benefits to the Plaintiff A.

Therefore, it is not sufficient to recognize that Plaintiff A suffered from a prone disability, such as the left-hand knee-free single, due to the instant accident, only on the basis of the descriptions of the health stand, Gap Nos. 1 through 5, and 8 concerning whether Plaintiff A suffered from a prone disability due to the instant accident, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Therefore, it is true.