1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs asserted that the defendant, who operates the Ksung branch, used the plaintiffs' pictures without permission for the promotion of hospital publicity, and claim consolation money to the defendant on the ground that the infringement of the right of publicity is the primary infringement and the conjunctive infringement of the right of publicity.

The evidence No. 5, which corresponds to the use without permission, is merely the unilateral statement of the representative L of the entertainment planning company to which the plaintiffs belong, and it is not believed. The evidence No. 3 and No. 4 are merely the statements of the evidence No. 5, and it is not sufficient to recognize that M, which recommended the defendant to use the plaintiffs for publicity of the defendant hospital, as an employee in charge of publicity of the defendant hospital, has made an endeavor to resolve the dispute smoothly between the plaintiffs and the defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit

Rather, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of pleadings in the evidence No. 6, evidence No. 1, evidence No. 2, evidence No. 2, evidence No. 3, evidence No. 4, evidence No. 5, evidence No. 5, evidence No. 6, evidence No. 7, evidence No. 8, evidence No. 10, evidence No. 11, evidence No. 12, witness evidence No. 12, and testimony No. 12, evidence No. 12, and evidence No. 12, and evidence No. 10, the plaintiffs entrusted L with the right to use the plaintiffs' entertainment activities or their representative as a representative of entertainment planning company at the time of concluding the above exclusive agreement with L, and it can be acknowledged that L has permitted the plaintiffs to use pictures to publicize the defendant's hospital that is seeking to develop the Chinese gender market in order to have the plaintiffs enter the Chinese entertainment market.

3. According to the conclusion, each of the claims by the plaintiffs in this case is dismissed without any further need to be examined. It is so decided as per Disposition.