1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: "The defendant (he heir) and the defendant (the defendant) entered the part of the 10th 7 and 8th 8th 10 of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case as to "the defendants became the heir of the defendant, and the defendant was the party to the lawsuit of this case"; "after the 6th 2 and 3th "cogrative damage adjustment corporation" (hereinafter "cogrative damage adjustment"), "after the 10th 3th 3th 10th 10th 10 "the ruling of this case" (hereinafter "the ruling of this case")" (hereinafter "the judgment of this case"), and "the creditor was engaged in the last son fishery at the time of the accident of this case"; since it is difficult to find that the creditor's assertion in the main sentence of the 128th 4th 4th 4th 4th 10th 2th 2th 2th 7th 201.

[Supplementary Part] [Attachment 12] Even if the obligees' lost income is not recognized even if the obligees' lost income, it should be recognized as a minimum consolation money for mental damage suffered by the obligees due to the accident of this case.

[Attachment 14] (5) According to the result of the inquiry inquiry of the head of Seocheon-gun of this court on December 9, 2015, part of the creditors can be acknowledged as participating in the pest control work due to the instant accident.

However, it is difficult to readily conclude that the creditor was engaged in fisheries on the sole basis of the circumstance that the creditor participated in the pest control work could be the basis for having the creditor residing in the vicinity of the affected area of the instant accident.

6. The creditor network K (Defendant No. 732).