1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant is modified as follows.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff A KRW 3,000,000.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Around 2013, Plaintiff A entered the H University Sports Department as Aki player, and Plaintiff B and C are the parents of Plaintiff A, and the Defendant was a current or former professor in the HJ Team’s supervision and sports department.

B. On November 26, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 500,000 by the Seoul Northern District Court for the following criminal facts (No. 2013 High Court Decision 201Da14065), and the said summary order was finalized around that time.

At around 17:00 on April 19, 2013, the Defendant served both the Plaintiff and the first-year players, who are the Plaintiff, at H University 811, on the ground that the Plaintiff continued to participate in the Hakib training without any speech, and served both the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff A, on the ground that the Plaintiff was not good, the Defendant left the Plaintiff’s office in the said laboratory and caused the Plaintiff’s remaining players to be out of the inside, and was assaulted by the Plaintiff’s hand when the Plaintiff’s knifeed the Plaintiff’s knife. [based on recognition] [Article 2, 5, 13 (including the knife number), 1, and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the entire arguments, and the purport of all arguments.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant committed an illegal act, such as assaulting the plaintiff A. Thus, in collaboration with the co-defendant E and the joint defendant educational foundation G prior to separation from the court of first instance, the defendant shall pay the plaintiff A a solatium amounting to KRW 50 million, KRW 15 million,000, KRW 15,000,000, and KRW 15,000,000, and delay damages for each of the above amounts.

B. According to the above facts of recognition of damages liability, the defendant is liable to compensate the damages suffered by the plaintiffs as a result of direct violence against the plaintiff Gap.

C. Since it is apparent in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiffs suffered mental suffering due to the defendant's harmful act within the scope of liability for damages, the defendant is obligated to pay monetary compensation to the plaintiffs, and the defendant's instruction and supervision as the supervisor of the Ahovaki Team is the defendant.