beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 6,00,000 to Plaintiff A, KRW 4,627,200 to Plaintiff B, KRW 3,000,00 to Plaintiff C, and Plaintiff.
Reasons
Basic Facts
Defendant H related to the parties is the director of K kindergarten (hereinafter “K kindergarten”) located in the JJ in the area of Sung-nam branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch, who is in charge of the duties of the said kindergarten, and Defendant G is the “L team teacher” of the instant kindergarten.
Defendant I is the chief director as the founder of the instant kindergarten.
Plaintiff
A (M) and Plaintiff D (N) are children who entered the above kindergarten L/C and received education from Defendant G, and Plaintiff B, Plaintiff E, and F are the parents of Plaintiff D.
As a result of the criminal trial against Defendant G and H, the prosecutor of the Sung-nam branch office of the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office prosecuted Defendant G against the crime of violating the Child Welfare Act (Habitual child abuse) and Defendant H against the crime of violating the Child Welfare Act, on the ground that Defendant G habitually committed a child’s physical abuse, or a emotional abuse detrimental to the health and development of a child, or detrimental to the mental health and development of a child, such as Plaintiff A and D, who is a child.
On February 2, 2017, the full bench of the above criminal case determined that the crime of violating the Child Welfare Act (Habitual child abuse) was established against part of the criminal facts committed by Defendant G, and sentenced Defendant G to six months of imprisonment with prison labor, and sentenced Defendant H to a judgment of acquittal for the reason that the joint penal provisions of the Child Welfare Act cannot be applied to the president of the kindergarten (U.S. District Court 2015No3055), and the above judgment was finalized through the appellate court (U.S. District Court 2017No1316) and the final appeal (Supreme Court 2017Do1415).
In the above final judgment, the facts constituting Defendant G’s crime against Plaintiff A and D are as follows: (a) around 12:47 on March 6, 2015, on the ground that Defendant G was in distress with Plaintiff A’s child, and that Plaintiff A was in distress with Plaintiff A, a child of the same L Ban; and (b) Plaintiff A was seated with Plaintiff A’s body, and then Plaintiff A’s bridge continues to be tightly sealed.