1. The judgment of the first instance, including the plaintiffs' claims added and expanded by this court, shall be modified as follows.

Basic Facts

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as stated in the part of “1. Basic Facts” from 2th to 3th 10th 10 of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this Court cited this part pursuant to the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(Attachment) At the time of the occurrence of the instant accident (Article 5(1) of the State Compensation Act), the sodrum frame of the instant case did not meet the legal safety requirements. As a result of the inspection of installation of the surface materials for shocking, which was inserted in the instant park, there was a defect in the installation and management that did not meet the ordinary safety requirements according to its intended purpose, such as making a determination of “unconformity.”

As a result, as C dies due to the occurrence of the instant accident, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiffs, their inheritors, KRW 326,111,859 = 572,223,719 respectively (C’s lost profit of KRW 335,469,253 + positive damages such as medical expenses + KRW 36,754,466 + 200,000,000 for each of the Plaintiffs’ shares in inheritance + 0.50 shares in inheritance of each of the Plaintiffs’ emotional damages + 40,000,000 for each of the Plaintiffs’ emotional damages and delay damages.

Although public officials belonging to the defendant have a duty to take measures to prohibit the use of the park of this case before receiving the installation inspection after the maintenance work of the park of this case, the public officials belonging to the defendant opened the park of this case before the installation inspection in violation of this duty, and accordingly C died.

In addition, in the process of the instant lawsuit, the public officials belonging to the Defendant removed the surface materials for the slater and shock absorption, which are the object of appraisal, and concealed the result of failure to pass the installation inspection of the instant park.

Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay the above money to the plaintiffs due to the breach of duty by public officials belonging to the defendant.

Due to the defect in the construction and management of public structures.