1. Each appeal by the plaintiffs and the defendants, and the request for the return of provisional payment by the defendant school foundation CS are dismissed.

2...

1. The court of first instance accepted part of the part of the plaintiffs' claim for consolation money against the defendants as stated in the separate sheet 1-1, and dismissed all of the plaintiffs' claim for consolation money and compensation for property damage and the plaintiffs' claim as stated in the separate sheet 1-2.

As to this, the plaintiffs appealed against only the part against each of the lost claims, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the plaintiffs' claim of consolation money against the defendants.

2. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: 13 to 16, 22 to 6, 30 to 30, 30 to 6, 30 to 6 and 5, 22 to 5, 31 to 85 to 96, 31 to 31, and 4 to 85 to 86, and 420 to 42 of the judgment of the court of first instance, 420 of the Civil Procedure Act are as stated by the defendants of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition of the judgment as to the application for return of provisional payment by the defendant CSS to 85 to 96.

3. The addition;

A. Defendant CS asserts that it is unreasonable to recognize consolation money following the closure of the DE University as to the Plaintiffs who are responsible for the operation of the DE University and the closure of the DE University, as the Plaintiffs obtained unfairly credits without attending classes.

According to the results of fact-finding with the Minister of Education, only one of the plaintiffs is the list of students assigned to the DE University dormitory by grasping the curriculum department at the time of the instant special audit in 2011.