All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The lower court rejected the Plaintiff’s claim on the following grounds.

With respect to the claim for damages caused by a public offering or intentional act, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendants directly participated in the act of violence or directed the violence victim during the process of the assembly or demonstration of this case, and that the Defendants conspired with the person who committed a violent demonstration, and that there is no

With respect to the claim for damages caused by negligence, there is insufficient proof as to “the relation between the participant or individual violence and the Defendants,” which is the premise for the recognition of proximate causal relation between the Defendants’ act of holding an assembly or demonstration and the act of deviating from part of the demonstration. ① The Defendants’ act was seen in the motive and process of holding the assembly or demonstration of this case, the degree of proof as to whether the Defendants’ act had an influence on the act of violence, ② the degree of proof as to whether the Defendants could sufficiently prevent the Defendants’ act of violence, ③ the purport of guaranteeing the freedom of assembly or demonstration as a fundamental right under the Constitution, the submission of the Plaintiff evidence alone determined that it is difficult to acknowledge proximate causal relation between the Defendants’ act of holding the assembly or demonstration of this case and the act of violence, or the Plaintiff’s damage.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by omitting judgment as to joint tort under Article 760(2) of the Civil Act, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to the burden of proof, the establishment of joint tort and proximate causal relation, contrary to what is alleged in the

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.