20 Gaz. 121204 Baz.

1. A;

2. B

3. C

4. D;

Plaintiff 1 through 4’s address

Plaintiff 3 and 4 are minors.

The legal representative A and the mother B

5. E.

[Judgment of the court below]

F

Law Firm Masung (Law Firm Masung, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1

May 28, 2021

July 9, 2021

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff A, B, C, and E 10,000 won each, and 5,000,000 won each, and 12% interest per annum from the day after the delivery of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Plaintiff A and B are married couple, and C and D are children of Plaintiff A and B, and Plaintiff E are the mother of Plaintiff B.

B. On August 15, 2020, while serving as the managing director of the apartment complex in which the plaintiffs reside, the defendant attended the COVID-19 virus (hereinafter “COVD-19 virus”) on August 15, 2020. On August 16, 2020 and August 17, 2020, the Central Disaster and Safety Countermeasure Headquarters sent a letter of disaster to encourage the participants of the Malar language meeting to take part in the COVD-19 virus.

C. On August 18, 2020, the plaintiff E was the Dong representative of the apartment, and the defendant was present at the office of the apartment management office office around 15:30 on August 18, 2020, and around 19:00 on the same day, the defendant and Dong representative and Dong representative were held at the apartment management office.

D. On August 20, 2020, the Defendant underwent a cocoin or an inspection, and was judged as Coin or a confirmation on August 21, 2020.

E. The plaintiff E, after hearing the defendant's co-ro or the confirmation of the truth, was hospitalized on August 22, 2020 to September 5, 2020, after receiving the correct truth-finding on August 22, 2020. The plaintiff Eul was hospitalized in each hospital from August 26, 2020 to September 17, 202, and the plaintiff Eul was isolated from the plaintiff Eul. The plaintiff Eul was hospitalized in each hospital from September 7, 2020 to September 14, 202, from August 26, 2020 to September 27, 2020 to the plaintiff Eul.

F. On August 17, 2020, the Defendant was investigated on the charge of violating the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act (hereinafter “ Infectious Disease Prevention Act”) that the Defendant obstructed the epidemiological investigation by intentionally failing to make a statement about G during the epidemiological investigation process on August 21, 2020, while receiving a non-prosecution disposition by the prosecutor of the Ulsan District Prosecutors’ Office on April 22, 2021.

[Reasons for Recognition]

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment as to them

A. Summary of the plaintiffs' assertion

The Defendant promoted with Plaintiff E without using a cro or inspection, even though he was able to fully recognize that he was infected by his cronas because of the fact that he was present at the cro or the symptoms of his cromatics, while attending the luminous assembly, a number of coaches or the crosium had occurred, and the participants in the luminous assembly have been present at the cro or the crosium. The Defendant, by intention or gross negligence, caused Plaintiff E and thereby, caused Plaintiff B, C, and C to be infected by the cronas or the crosa. Accordingly, the Defendant is liable to pay KRW 10 million for consolation money for the emotional distress suffered by the Plaintiffs due to such tort, and KRW 5 million for Plaintiff D.

B. Determination

The Defendant’s non-prosecution statement (No. 1) on the charge of violating the Infectious Disease Prevention Act indicates that the Defendant was infected in the process of participating in the Madical Assembly and that the symptoms were shown on August 17, 2020. However, there is no evidence to confirm specific infection route or symptoms (However, there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant stated that he was given a prescription for the matha, the matha’s mathath, and the mathathatha’s mathathath, around August 18, 2020), and there is no evidence to prove that there was a symptoms to suspect cona at the time of the Defendant’s interview with Plaintiff E.

Ultimately, the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs alone is difficult to recognize the defendant's intentional or negligent intent or negligence to recognize the defendant's tort liability for the infection of the plaintiffs E, A, B, and C, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.

Judges Gangwon-do