1. The judgment of the first instance, including the claims extended by this court, shall be modified as follows:

A. As to the plaintiffs, I.D.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows. Defendant G added or added part of the judgment of the first instance as to this case. Defendant G added or added the judgment as to the argument at this court as set forth in paragraph (2) below, and therefore, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

Part 4 7 provides that "No. 7-7 of evidence No. 7" shall be changed to "No. 11,12, and 14 of the 4th 7th 7th 6th 7th ; "O" shall be changed to "Defendant I; "O" shall be changed to "V"; "No. 2th 8th 2th 5th 15th 16th 15th 16th 15th 16th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th "the plaintiffs' inheritance shares" shall be changed to "No. 15th 10th 15th 6th 7th 7th 6th 6th 10; "No. 10th 5th 12th 5th 11); "No. 12th 13th 15th 13th 15th 14th 15th 15th 14th 15th 15th 1".

In the existing study, if the examination scores of simple mental condition do not exceed 16 to 19 points, it is reported that the damage to decision-making ability is strongly suggested.

Therefore, at the time of November 29, 2013 and December 30, 2012, the Deceased has the ability to make reasonable judgments based on the meaning or result of his act on the basis of normal perception and the ability of towing.