1. The Defendants jointly share each of the Plaintiffs’ KRW 4,00,000 and each of the said respective money from July 7, 2016 to December 7, 2016.

1. In fact, G was killed on June 12, 1979 (finite history).

(hereinafter referred to as “the deceased G” or “the deceased”). The deceased G’s grave (hereinafter referred to as “the instant grave”) was installed in the Hocheon-gun H (hereinafter referred to as “the instant forest”) in Gyeonggi-do, and the word “I” was installed in front of the said grave.

The Plaintiffs, as their children of the deceased G, shall have a negative record every year before the relocation of the instant grave without permission, deemed to be followed.

6. Around December 12, 200, Plaintiff C buried in the instant grave, and on behalf of the Plaintiffs, had jointly protected and managed the instant grave, including the deceased’s date and the sculption.

Defendant E, from J to K, posted a public notice on the finding of the relative of the instant grave in the Central and Aju Economic Examination, and ordered the relocation of the instant grave to Defendant F, who is the principal funeral of the graveyard, on the ground that the relative did not appear.

Defendant F, at the end of May, 2015 or at the beginning of June 2015, through the use of heavy equipment and human parts without the consent or consent of the Plaintiffs, cut the remains in and out of the instant grave, and then buried the remains in and near the boundary of the instant forest by using heavy equipment, and then buried the remains in and near the instant grave, and then buried the body stone created for the remains in and near the said body stone.

[Basis] Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence 1 and 2, evidence 1-3, evidence 4-12, 5, 6-1-7 of evidence 7, Eul's evidence 2, evidence 3-12 of evidence 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Defendants, which established the liability for damages, are obliged to pay consolation money for mental distress suffered by the Plaintiffs jointly due to the Defendants’ act of arbitrarily throwing away the remains of the deceased and thus, it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiffs, who jointly protect the graves of this case, suffered emotional distress.

2.3.