1. Defendant B and Defendant D jointly share KRW 37,480,000 with respect to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s aforementioned costs from December 22, 2015 to February 16, 2016.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Defendant B, Defendant D, and Nonparty E are middle school students, and the Plaintiff is Nonparty E’s mother.

B. On December 21, 2014, around 11:00 on December 21, 2014, Defendant B and Defendant D, with Nonparty F and Nonparty G, knew of the fact that Nonparty E’s family members run an overseas tour and run an overseas package, and infringed the password of Nonparty E’s house entrance without permission.

C. Defendant D stolen a plaque, etc. owned by the Plaintiff, which was the mother of the said E, by entering the said E’s house, between Defendant B, etc. in the living room. Around 04:00 on the following day, Defendant D stolen a plaque, etc. owned by the Plaintiff and then stolen it by the same method on December 23, 2014, and thereby thefting the plaque, etc. owned by the Plaintiff. A total amount of KRW 27,480,000 as indicated in the attached list was stolen.

Defendant D is above C.

Due to the act of larceny, the defendant B was prosecuted for larceny (Seoul Southern District Court 2015dan801), and the defendant B was above B.

On November 30, 2015, the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors' Office was suspended from prosecution on November 30, 2015.

[Ground] Defendant B: A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, the purport of the entire pleadings, Defendant D: Decision on deemed confession (Articles 208(3)2 and 150(3) and (1) of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Claim against Defendant D and Defendant B

A. Defendant B merely intrudes upon the E’s house without permission, and there was no conspiracy between Defendant D and thief, and thus, it is contrary to the purport that Defendant D’s liability for joint tort is unreasonable.

A joint tort under the Civil Act is established when several acts objectively related to each other cause damage to another. It does not require not only a conspiracy among the actors, but also a common or common perception among the actors.

In addition, such a common act can be recognized as being jointly related to the occurrence of damage, such as the acquisition of stolen goods by embezzlement, as well as the joint or aid of a tort itself.

Supreme Court Decision 201No. 12, 201