beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.11.01 2017나305766

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for cases of dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, it is citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts used or added;

A. From July 15, 2015 to July 22, 2015, the first instance court held that, “The total amount of KRW 1,220,073 of the medical expenses incurred after receiving medical treatment from G Hospital and from Eliminary departments of G University Hospital from July 15, 2015 (i.e., KRW 32,260, KRW 1,187,813) have a substantial causal relationship with the instant injury,” and that, “The sum of the medical expenses incurred after receiving medical treatment from G Hospital and Eliminate departments of G University Hospital from July 16, 2015 to July 22, 2015 (i.e., KRW 1,114,383 (=32,260, KRW 1,082,123)” was calculated as follows.

B. On the third page 9 of the first instance judgment, the following judgments are added.

“B. The Defendant’s judgment on the Defendant’s main defense of safety shall pay KRW 1,940,000 in total to the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the appointed parties A, and then agreed that the Plaintiffs will not file a civil or criminal complaint (No. 2, and the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it violates the aforementioned subordinate claim agreement, etc.).

If the perpetrator and the victim agree to receive a certain amount of money and waive the remainder of the claim with respect to the tort liability, it shall be reasonable to deem that it is impossible to accept a claim for damages exceeding the agreed amount on the ground that the above damage has occurred ex post facto.

However, in the event that all damages are not clearly identified and the above agreement was reached, the right to claim damages that have been abandoned by the victim at the time of the agreement was predicted at that time.