2015 Ghana 12904 Damage (as such)

A

Since it is a minor, the legal representative B and C

1. D;

Since it is a minor, the legal representative E

2. F;

Since it is a minor, the legal representative G, the mother H

2016,5.20

June 17, 2016

1. The Defendants jointly pay to the Plaintiff 3,637,130 won with 5% interest per annum from April 30, 2013 to June 17, 2016, and 15% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims against the defendants are dismissed.

3. 1/10 of the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendants, respectively.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The Defendants jointly pay to the Plaintiff 35,195,90 won with 5% interest per annum from April 30, 2013 to the service date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 15% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

1. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The plaintiff

I and the Defendants continued to commit unlawful acts, such as sexual harassment, sexual indecent acts, and assault, against the Plaintiff. The Defendants jointly have the obligation to jointly pay to the Plaintiff KRW 35,195,90,000 in total, including medical expenses of KRW 5,195,90 and solatium KRW 30,000 (the amount calculated by deducting KRW 20,000,000 paid out of solatium 50,000) and damages for delay.

B. Defendants

The Defendants do not have any fact of having committed sexual harassment, sexual indecent act, and assault against the Plaintiff, and even if not, it is caused by the Plaintiff, so the amount of damages should be significantly reduced.

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

Considering the overall purport of the statements and arguments in Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1, 2, 3, 4, and 10, the plaintiff, the defendants, and I were dynamics who are not in the same high school, and defendant D was able to pay damages to the plaintiff repeatedly from November 201 to April 2013, 201, and defendant D committed an indecent act against the plaintiff two times from October 10 to the 17th day of the same month, and the defendant F was able to pay damages to the plaintiff's appearance as his own joint act (Article 16 (2) of the Civil Act). The defendant F was able to pay damages to the plaintiff as his own joint tortfeasor at the time of his own act (Article 16 (2) of the Civil Act).

[On the other hand, I became aware of the Plaintiff from the Defendants, and recognized that he committed an indecent act, such as making the Plaintiff as soon as he had his sexual organ over twice on July 2014, and therefore I shall be held liable for medical expenses and consolation money after the date of the said illegal act, and I adjusted to the effect that he was exempt from joint tort liability while paying KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff.]

3. Calculation of damages;

(a) Medical expenses: 5,195,900 won; and

Comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6 and the overall purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff continued to receive medical treatment from November 15, 2013 due to depression, etc., and accordingly, the Plaintiff’s total amount of money paid by the Plaintiff was recognized as constituting 5,195,900.

B. Limitation on liability

In full view of the evidence and the purport of the oral argument mentioned above, it is reasonable to limit the liability of the defendants to 70% in consideration of all the circumstances such as the plaintiff and the defendants' age, gender, and relationship. The compensation amount: 50,000,000 won joint tort liability is not individually seeking damages for each tortfeasor's act but pursuing the tort jointly committed by the perpetrator. As such, the scope of the liability for damages due to joint tort liability is determined by comprehensively assessing all the acts committed by the tortfeasor in relation to the victim. The compensation amount is that each tortfeasor bears the responsibility for the whole amount of damages, and even if one tortfeasor bears the degree of processing the tort compared to other perpetrator, the scope of the liability of the tortfeasor cannot be limited to part of the compensation amount as above in relation to the victim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da66660, Nov. 10, 2005).

According to the above legal principles, when calculating consolation money for the plaintiff due to joint tort between the defendants and the plaintiff, the defendants, the plaintiff, and I, together with the evidence and the purport of the whole arguments mentioned above, committed a tort due to the climaticization of the circumstances that were recognized as being dynamics, that are, the plaintiff, and the plaintiff were suffering from the plaintiff's sclimatic difficulties, and the defendant committed a tort due to repeated and serious losses, and the plaintiff as a plaintiff attempted suicide due to the shock that makes it difficult to sclie. However, when considering the circumstances and records that the defendants did not sclibling their errors, but did not sclibling their responsibility, and all the circumstances revealed in the course of the pleading, it is reasonable to determine the plaintiff's consolation money amounting to 50 million won and the plaintiff's consolation money.

(d) Mutual aid:

Meanwhile, 20,000,000 won paid to the Plaintiff is first appropriated to the consolation money, and there is no dispute between the parties.

(e) the amount of loss;

Therefore, the Defendants jointly have the obligation to jointly pay to the Plaintiff KRW 33,637,130 (5,195,90 x 0.7) plus KRW 30,000,00 (20,000 - KRW 20,000) and damages for delay calculated by adding 5% per annum under the Civil Act from April 30, 2013 to June 17, 2016, as the Plaintiff seeks, to dispute over the existence and scope of the rights and obligations of the Defendants from April 30, 2013 to June 17, 2016, and to pay damages for delay calculated by 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of full payment.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Jeong Jong-k