1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Defendant B is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Defendant B is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Defendant B is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Defendant B is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

B. D and E, the Plaintiff’s parent, divorced around the time when the Plaintiff died, and the Plaintiff lived with her mother, and the Plaintiff re-satisfed D around 2004, but the contact was cut down since 2012.

C. D was diagnosed as Teinson’s disease in 2006 and received hospital treatment several times, and died on July 19, 2016 (direct death) from November 9, 2015, when being hospitalized in a convalescent hospital.

Defendant B, in consultation with some siblings, laid the funeral ceremony of D, laid the body of the deceased D on July 20, 2016. At the time, the Plaintiff was unable to contact with the deceased D.

On the other hand, D sold F apartment 106, 1506, 1506 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) from the Korea National Housing Corporation, and acquired ownership on May 8, 2001.

D on March 24, 2015, sold the instant apartment in KRW 80 million to G. On April 8, 2015, the remainder of the purchase price was deposited into the account on April 8, 2015, and was transferred to Defendant B on April 9, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 14, Eul evidence 4 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff, as a producer and relative of the network D, has the right to manage and dispose of the deceased’s remains and remains, and the Defendants conspired in collusion with the Plaintiff and thus infringed on the rights. As such, the Defendants should pay KRW 20,000,100 to consolation money due to the above tort. (2) The Defendants were to look at the judgment of the Plaintiff. (1) Even if following the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff failed to contact with D from 2012, and there was no evidence to prove that the Defendants interfered with the contact between D and the Plaintiff. (2) The Defendants’ contact with the Plaintiff.