1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 14,782,050 to Plaintiff A, KRW 2,50,000 to Plaintiff B, and KRW 5,00,00 to Plaintiff C, and the above amount.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 2015, Plaintiff A (FF) was enrolled in the third grade of the Busan International School (hereinafter “instant school”); Plaintiff B and C were the parents of Plaintiff A; the Defendants were parents of H who were enrolled in the same half of the same school as Plaintiff A.

B. Around March 23, 2015, H and Plaintiff A had been playing for a long time in the field of the playground of the instant school playground where multiple students were gathered, and H were deemed to have been holding the bridge of Plaintiff A to satise Plaintiff A for a long time than himself/herself, and in the process, Plaintiff A’s Ba and panty were off to the knee extent.

Accordingly, the plaintiff A, who was suffering from chemicalization, rootsd the sand to H, and H said that the plaintiff I, J, and H said three other friendships (I, J, and K) were the plaintiff A, and that the plaintiff A was the hand that the plaintiff et al. prevented the plaintiff A from coming to his her son, and H from coming to his son, the plaintiff et al. was put into the plaintiff A's entry by cutting down the sand with the other hand, while putting the sand into the plaintiff's entry.

(hereinafter “the primary harmful act of this case”). C.

On September 11, 2015, Plaintiff A was fluent with L, and H was fluent with L, and Plaintiff A was fluent with L while playing in a classroom, Plaintiff A was fluent with the wind that Plaintiff A was fluent with H, and Plaintiff A was fluent with kne, and Plaintiff A was fluent with L and M on the ground that Plaintiff A was not fluent with the death.

L has been timeed several times of the plaintiff A's her her son, and M has taken four times of the plaintiff A's her son.

After that, the arbitration of the son’s students who entered the classroom showed that the case occurred by the Plaintiff Company A to go to H. However, the son H in the classroom demanded the Plaintiff to go again to go to the Plaintiff, and caused the Plaintiff to go to the Plaintiff’s door while she asked the Plaintiff to go to go to the classroom, and the Plaintiff Company A, who went to the classroom, was able to go to go to the Plaintiff, was able to go to go to the Plaintiff’s face, and the Plaintiff Company A was able to go to go to the Plaintiff’s arms after the Plaintiff Company A.

hereinafter "the second harmful act of this case" and "the second harmful act of this case".