1. The Defendants jointly share the Plaintiff’s KRW 49,489,728, and KRW 2,00,000 to Plaintiff B, and KRW 2,00,000 to Plaintiff C.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The facts of recognition 1) Plaintiff A entered the 306 supplementary training course on August 20, 2013, and received training for five weeks from August 24, 2013 to October 4, 2013 at the 30th Sick Military Education Team. Plaintiff A was exclusively/serviceed and sent to G (hereinafter referred to as “G”) from October 29, 2013 to November 4, 2013.

) From November 8, 2013, Defendant D and E served in H. The same tenant is appointed soldiers. (2) Defendant D used the same tenant as Defendant D and E used the Plaintiff on November 19, 2013 to January 2, 2014; and Defendant E used the Plaintiff on December 19, 2013.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant assault.” Plaintiff A suffered from a high-level astronomical injury on the left-hand left-hand side due to Defendant E’s assault on December 19, 2013, and Defendant D and E shows symptoms of “after-hand stress symptoms” up to now.

3) On May 20, 2014, Defendant D was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 4 years and 1 year of imprisonment, and Defendant E was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 years and 2 years of imprisonment. Around that time, the judgment became final and conclusive (2014No77.4 of the High Military Court) on July 28, 2014.

5) Plaintiff A’s center, Plaintiff B’s division, and Plaintiff C’s children (which are described in subparagraphs 1 through 4, and 14, respectively, based on recognition, the result of each physical commission on the director of the Katol University Seoul Glol Hospital, and the director of the women’s mother hospital, the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole.

B. 1) Even when considering the special situation of Defendant D and E’s act of violence in the military, it cannot be justified as an unlawful assault and cruel act beyond that of giving due attention to the need for the performance of duties. 2) In order to perform the duty of national defense as provided under the Constitution, both Plaintiff A, Defendant D and E were serving in the military regardless of their will.

In particular, in the special situation of the military service, there is a continuous problem of rescue by an appointed soldier in the military service.

(See Evidence A No. 8). Defendant Republic of Korea shall pay continuous attention to the military life of soldiers through the commander.