beta
Text
1. Defendant D’s KRW 9,00,000 for Plaintiff C and 5% per annum from February 2, 2017 to October 4, 2018.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
(1) Defendant D operates teaching institutes teaching school curriculum, English, sports, art, etc. with the trade name, “HAD(hereinafter “the instant private teaching institute”) in Busan F and G, and Defendant D is a 6-year-old teacher of the instant private teaching institute (hereinafter “six-year-old teacher”).
Z. The Plaintiff C was the mother of the Plaintiff A (born in 2011), and around May 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a teaching contract with Defendant D with the content of the teaching, including after-school learning, of the instant private teaching institute (hereinafter “instant teaching contract”).
Plaintiff
A has been taught in the sixth-year-old group in which Defendant E was enrolled, and Plaintiff B is the father of Plaintiff A.
Secondly, among the tuition fees of the instant private teaching institute in 2016, the tuition fees of KRW 970,00 per month, KRW 250,00 per month after 2:30 p.m., including teaching materials, and KRW 480,00 per month for meal expenses for six months, and KRW 200,00 for preparation materials for six months.
Plaintiff
C From May 4, 2015 to February 6, 2017, Defendant D paid totaling KRW 23,328,000 as the tuition fees of the instant private teaching institute.
x. The sixth-year-old group is conducting the same class as the time table in attached Form 6 from the Triday to the Friday.
(v) around February 3, 2017, Plaintiff C responded to the instant private teaching institute that Plaintiff A had his head on the floor while going beyond the scope of other private teaching institutes on February 2, 2017, the preceding day of Plaintiff C, who was on February 6, 2017.
Plaintiff
C On February 6, 2017, the Defendants demanded to show CCTV installed in the class of six years of age to verify the facts of assault, but the Defendants promised not to use personal information for purposes other than the intended purpose or provide it to a third party, and shall be legally liable for the violation.
“A” has changed the letter of consent to the purport and rejected it, and suspended the teaching in the Plaintiff’s instant private teaching institute.