손해배상(기)
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. Occurrence of liability for damages and limitation on liability;
A. On March 30, 2014, the Defendant: (a) abused the Plaintiff as his hand and scam on the ground that the Plaintiff had made a non-scam to Defendant’s daily living; and (b) caused the Plaintiff to take approximately two weeks of treatment; and (c) on July 25, 2014, the Defendant was subject to a disposition of suspension of indictment from an investigative agency on the charge of the Plaintiff’s above injury.
(based on recognition) The fact that there is no dispute over the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office 2014No. 48576. [Attachment 48576], each entry and video of evidence A1 to 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings
B. 1) According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the above assault act. However, in full view of all the circumstances revealed during the arguments of this case, including (1) the fact that the defendant was subject to a disposition of suspension of indictment from an investigative agency due to the suspicion that inflicted an injury on the plaintiff or the defendant, (2) the plaintiff was discovered to make a non-statement to the defendant's behavior and caused the defendant to commit the above assault act, it is reasonable to limit the defendant's liability to
2. Scope of damages.
A. Active damages 1) The Plaintiff spent 432,320 won in total for the treatment costs of the Defendant’s assault (i.e., KRW 333,520, 29,800, 29,000, 3333,520, 39,000, and 69,000,000, for the first time, for the treatment costs of the Defendant’s assault. The fact that there is no dispute between the parties, or that the amount of KRW 1,00,00 is spent for the future treatment costs may be recognized in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff spent 260,000,000,000 won in Korea for the treatment of brus, Sweter, and sitts, etc.) with the Defendant’s assault, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that there was no other evidence to acknowledge that the damage was incurred solely on the video evidence of subparagraphs 5 through 8.
3..