1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The parties' assertion

A. Defendant D, the head of Defendant B, Defendant C, the head of a fishing village fraternity, was the Plaintiff’s assertion E, and Defendant C, the head of a female farm, closed all of the 2,200,000,000,000 Mari-ri market price, which was 2,20,000,000, which was 2,220,000,000,000 won by destroying and damaging the floodgate at the 18,000,000,000,000,000 won.

Therefore, the Defendants should compensate for the total amount of KRW 20,300,000 for the damages suffered by the Plaintiff due to the Defendants’ tort.

B. The Defendants asserted that they visited the aquaculture to oppose the Plaintiff, but did not damage the floodgate opening and closing machines or drain pipes of the aquaculture.

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, Gap evidence No. 11 and each video of Gap evidence Nos. 6 and 10, 30 residents of E community including the defendants were found to have a new fish farm operated by the plaintiff on May 12, 2016, and a claim was made in relation to the fish farm. During this process, it can be acknowledged that the floodgate opening and discarding of the fish farm and the drain pipe was damaged. However, the above facts alone destroyed the floodgate opening and closing machine and drain pipe of the fish farm directly in addition to the defendants' defense against the plaintiff.

It is not sufficient to recognize that the E community residents who were or were at the site and the act of damage were recruited, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is justified on the basis of its conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.