The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. From July 5, 2019, the Plaintiff received a training course in the quota at C pandition points operated by the Defendant.

B. On July 25, 2019, at around 18:40 on July 25, 2019, the Plaintiff was under pressured 1st century in the process that the Defendant got protruding to the wall in the course of facing a protruding quota.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, evidence 1 to 2-1, Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident occurred in the course of the practice by which the Defendant 3 to 4 minutes show approximately 200 to 250 scisfys the three students scisfy on the wall, leaving the scisfy by three students scisfy on the wall, and returning back to the wall. The Defendant scisfyed the Plaintiff scisfy on the day when the Plaintiff scisfys the Plaintiff’s chest and head scisfy on the part of the Plaintiff’s chest and scisfy on the back at the training speed

At this time, the Defendant did not sufficiently examine the Plaintiff’s ability to attend the school, and ② organized the Plaintiff and two young men in the same class group, and took lessons at a speed that the Plaintiff is difficult to cope with, ③ did not make it possible to predict the risk such as the instant accident in advance and thoroughly conduct safety education. ④ The Defendant violated the duty of care to protect and supervise students by providing education or training to prevent any public disturbance at a speed that is difficult to receive by the Plaintiff at a higher level.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate for damages sustained by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case.

3. In light of the following circumstances, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone can be readily concluded that the instant accident occurred due to the Defendant’s breach of duty of care, in light of the following circumstances, which can be seen by adding up the respective descriptions of the evidence set forth in subparagraphs 2 through 11 (including serial numbers) and the entire purport of the film