Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs regarding the amount ordered to be paid under the judgment against the plaintiffs.

1. The parties' assertion

A. Defendant D’s assertion 1) 1 regarded the Plaintiff A as having many people, including the Plaintiff B, who is the Plaintiff’s child, and led the Plaintiff A to a unilateral verbal abuse and insult, such as “I have abandoned the Plaintiff’s child,” “I have given an order to bring her to his/her mother,” “I have given his/her mother,” and “I have given his/her mother to his/her father,” and Defendant E, instead of being Defendant D, was “H,” and he/she participated in the Plaintiff’s work with Defendant D, and added the Plaintiff. 2) The Plaintiff A was congested with shock and extreme stress caused by the Plaintiff’s continued verbal abuse, thereby getting involved in the first-aid vehicle.

3) Plaintiff A’s false statement of fact, intimidation, and verbal abuse by the Defendants, which led to misunderstanding that Plaintiff A deserted or abused Nonparty G, a child of the Defendants, suffered serious mental impulses with the body and honor of Plaintiff A, and Plaintiff B, who was preparing a swimming game, was also subject to serious mental impulses. 4) The Defendants’ act constitutes a tort liability against the Plaintiffs on the ground that the Defendants’ act constitutes a tort caused by defamation, insult, and assault by publicly alleging false facts.

5) The Defendants are obligated to pay the Plaintiff A medical expenses of KRW 355,350, consolation money of KRW 4,000,000, in total, KRW 4,355,350, and KRW 2,000,000 for consolation money of KRW 4,355,350, and delay damages therefor to the Plaintiff. (B) The Defendants asserted 1 of the Defendants as follows: (a) while the Defendants were in the dwelling with Nonparty G, who was in the dwelling with Nonparty G, a child, and were in the dwelling with Nonparty G, the term “I am unable to live due to collapse, because of width,” and the term “I am in the dwelling.”

2) Plaintiff A, while taking the initiative of the players instead of coaches, ordered Nonparty G to take the initiative of the players to Defendant D, and did not put Nonparty G to the vehicle, and the Defendants moved to G in the restaurant. Plaintiff A left Nonparty G in the restaurant. 3) The Plaintiff left the restaurant.