1. All appeals by the plaintiffs and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

purport, purport, and.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 17, 2012 and October 21, 2013, the Defendant’s son’s D (E) was subject to a protective disposition issued on two occasions on August 17, 2012, by forcing the Plaintiff B, who is his/her father, to commit an indecent act (hereinafter “instant tort”), and on October 21, 2013.

(Seoul District Court Order 2013 P.605). (b)

At the time of the tort of this case, the Defendant liveded with D, a first-year student of middle school, and protected and brought up D.

(Entry of Evidence No. 1 and the purport of whole pleadings)

2. According to the facts found in the establishment of tort liability, D is a middle student at the time of the tort of this case and her mother resides together with the Defendant, who is his mother, and dependent on the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant was obligated to guide and supervise the Defendant so that D, his child, does not commit the tort such as indecent act.

Nevertheless, as a result of the Defendant’s neglect of the above duty, D’s tort of this case was committed, the Defendant is liable for compensating the Plaintiffs for damages incurred by the tort of this case.

3. Scope of damages.

A. The Plaintiffs alleged in the claim 1) received mental treatment due to the instant tort, and spent the total of KRW 210,250 (i.e., medical treatment costs of Plaintiff A KRW 171,150 (i.e., KRW 39,100) for the medical treatment costs of Plaintiff A). According to the respective statements in the evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 14, the fact that Plaintiff B received mental treatment from May 4, 2013, and Plaintiff A from May 1, 2010 is recognized.

However, in light of the following circumstances, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiffs alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiffs received mental and medical treatment due to the instant illegal act. Therefore, this part of the Plaintiffs’ assertion is without merit. The Plaintiffs B commenced mental and medical treatment after about eight months from the instant illegal act, and Plaintiff A was under mental and medical treatment prior to the instant illegal act.