1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff A and C are the children of the deceased F (hereinafter "the deceased"), and the plaintiff B is the deceased's spouse.

On August 1, 2005, the deceased joined as a production employee of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) engaging in the business of manufacturing telecommunications machinery and accessories (hereinafter “G”), and served as the director of production management around 2008.

B. The Defendants hold 1/2 of their respective shares in G, and Defendant E is the representative director and Defendant D jointly operates G as an internal director.

C. On January 23, 2015, the Deceased discarded waste around 19:00, and was used before the house and discovered to neighboring residents, sent back to the 119 emergency medical service vehicle to the 119 emergency medical service vehicle, and died in cerebral color on February 11, 2016.

Accordingly, the plaintiffs did not install a climatic cliff to inhale harmful gases, such as fine dust, oil, and sod, even if harmful gases were discharged in large quantities in the process of producing parts of polychlorates using the rash processing machine as the inheritor of the deceased. ② The plaintiffs asserted that the deceased died in cerebral color due to the concentration of harmful gases, overfluor, stress, by having the deceased perform an excessive work for a long time, and filed a lawsuit for damages (san) with the Suwon District Court Support 2016Kadan104928.

E. On May 17, 2017, the foregoing court recognized the causal relationship between the deceased’s fruit and the deceased’s death, and sentenced the judgment partially accepting the Plaintiffs’ claim by recognizing liability for damages on the grounds that G did not take adequate protective measures to prevent the Deceased from overworking. The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, and 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the plaintiffs' claims

A. The main point of the argument is that the deceased cut and process polychlorates using the rasher processing machine G and then cut back part of the mobile phone and pipe antenna.