beta
Text
1. Defendant D’s KRW 5,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from October 1, 2018 to January 14, 2020, respectively, to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The facts following the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or can be found by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4, 5 (including each number), Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 1, 2, 5 through 13, 2-1 to 3, 3-2 to 7, and 4, and Eul evidence No. 2-1 to 2-1, 2, Eul evidence No. 1-3, 4, and 3-1.
The plaintiff is a student in the first grade of G Middle School in 2018, and the defendant D is a person with parental authority as the H's father in the same half of the plaintiff.
Defendant F is a person who served as the principal of G Middle School in 2018, and Defendant F is a local government that establishes and operates G Middle School.
B. H, together with I, J, K, L, etc., who are one of the same anti-friendlinesss, asked the Plaintiff and other students to question or sing the same sexual content in the presence of the students including the Plaintiff, and that he said that “I would report.” The Plaintiff said that “I will report.”
H, as a matter of the foregoing case, reported to the Plaintiff at the school “at the end of the report, I am going to the end. I am to the end of the report.”
C. On April 24, 2018, the Autonomous Committee on Countermeasures against School Violence in G Middle Schools held a meeting to determine whether to take measures for psychological counseling and advice under Article 16 (1) 1 and 6 of the Act on the Prevention of and Countermeasures against Violence in Schools (hereinafter “School Violence Prevention Act”) against the Plaintiff, N, andO, on the ground that “A student is already subject to death and to prevent recurrence, and some facts were not recognized.” The instant case is that a student, who is the relevant student, would not take any measure for H, I, and M, on the ground that he/she would have been thought to communicate with the student and his/her parents within the class and have sufficient preventive education in the school.” The Defendant F, on April 30, 2018, passed a resolution on the measures to be taken for psychological counseling and advice under Article 16 (1) 1 and 6 of the School Violence Prevention and Countermeasures Act (hereinafter “School Violence Prevention Act”).