Jeonbuk-North

【Court-Appellee】

[Defendant, Appellant] Li-Jin, Ear-Jin, Ear-Jin

ancient 00

Jeonbuk-North

Attorney Kim Jong-soo, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Patent sub-agent, Patent Attorney and Patent Attorney

Attorney Kim Jong-soo, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

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

A. The plaintiff is a member of the stable belonging to 000, a stable club. The defendant is a stable member who belongs to 000, a stable club.

B. On April 18, 2010, around 000: around 08:42, 00 high school playgrounds organized by 00 private teaching institutes in the 00-school located in the Jeonbuk-gun, Jeonbuk-gun, 00, for example, was engaged in the promotional games for the memorial games held by 00 private teaching institutes in the school sector. However, the Plaintiff’s failure.

In the process of wearing a player belonging to the same team, the defendant was born by the defendant in order to take the plaintiff from the right side of the plaintiff, and due to this reason, the plaintiff was faced with the plaintiff's injury of the complete strike to the right side of the sacrife, the sacrife of the non-sacratium sacrife, the right side siffese, and the right side siffese (hereinafter referred to as "accident of this case").

C. As a result, the Plaintiff was sent back to 00 hospitals located in Jeonjin-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City through the 119 first-aid vehicle and received first-aid treatment at around 10:20 on the same day, and was transferred to 00 university hospitals at around 17:0 on around 00, and was transferred to 00 hospitals located in Jeonjin-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and was hospitalized until April 26, 2010. Thereafter, the Plaintiff was hospitalized on April 27, 2010 and transferred to this hospital located in the 00-dong Special Metropolitan City on April 27, 2010 and was hospitalized until October 28, 201.

D. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff is a body assembly worker belonging to 000, and the instant accident lost the labor ability of 17% for a limited period of five years from April 28, 2010, on which the date when the Plaintiff performed an operation to cut down the saves of saves of saves of saves of saves of the instant accident.

【In the absence of dispute as to Gap evidence Nos. 3-1, Gap evidence Nos. 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 4 (including the number number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the video, and the result of the fact-finding on the body reduction of the original mining university hospital, the result of the fact-finding on the original mining university hospital of this court, the previous mining university hospital of this court, and the previous mining fire-fighting team of this state, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. Party’s assertion

1) The plaintiff's assertion

Although the Defendant had a duty of care to observe the stable competition regulations and to ensure that the other party does not suffer injury even in the event of physical contact, the Defendant intentionally committed an act of self-regulation that evidently leads to the other party to the right side of the Plaintiff by intentionally breaking the Plaintiff’s public room after the Plaintiff stops and breaking the other number of vessels, etc. Therefore, the Defendant was liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages incurred to the Plaintiff by doing so. Therefore, KRW 72,042,06,06 ( KRW 46,893,845, + KRW 1,229,212 + KRW 10,319,009,000 + KRW 60,000) of the damages incurred to the Plaintiff in the instant accident.

2) Defendant’s assertion

The defendant, in the course of extending outside a bridge to cut off the air during the stable game, was sloping to the plaintiff's left side. In that process, in order to put the center on the right side in order to avoid going beyond the plaintiff, the defendant was injured while putting the body on the right side in the process, which is merely an accident that may normally occur during the stable game, and the scope of risks permitted to be borne while going in the stable game.

Since it can be seen as an accident in the above, it cannot be deemed that the defendant's above act was intentional, negligent, or unlawful. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim in this case is unfair.

B. Determination

1) As a result of the fact-finding conducted on November 22, 201 and June 29, 2012, the fact-finding conducted by the Defendant on the part of the Plaintiff intentionally in depth on the right side of the Plaintiff, and on the part of the Plaintiff, it is not sufficient to recognize the fact-finding conducted by the fact-finding conducted on the front line fire station of this court, and there is no other evidence to prove the above facts-finding conducted by the Plaintiff.

Rather, since a participant in an athletic game may differ from other players by his/her own act, he/she is obligated to exercise safety care, which is a good faith duty to ensure the safety of life and body of other players, in compliance with the sports rules. However, a form of sports games such as decentralization or Taekwondo where the price for a counterpart player is mainly formed, or a form of sports games such as the axis or deaf-gu, in which physical contact is formed, is inherent in the game itself accompanying physical contact. A participant in the athletic game is at least at a certain degree and participating in the athletic game to the extent possible. Thus, whether the participant in the athletic game has fulfilled the above duty of care, shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, such as the type and risk of the athletic game in question, the situation at the time of the athletic progress, whether there is observance of the regulations by the relevant parties, the nature, degree of violation, degree of injury, and degree of injury, etc., and if the act did not go beyond the reasonable scope of sociality, it shall not be decided that he/she is not liable to compensate for damages.

In light of the above legal principles, 00 educational foundation held a educulation for the purpose of gathering friendship with local residents as part of sports-for-all. At the time, 3 sports was held, and 00, which was the chief Justice, demanded that the players belonging to 00 and 00 participate in the educulation for the purpose of promoting friendship. The Plaintiff’s act of using the educulation for the educulation for the purpose of promoting friendship is difficult to be seen as having performed a sufficient preparation campaign prior to the commencement of the educulation. The Plaintiff’s act of using the educulation as part of 000 and 00 players belonging to each of the instant educulation for the purpose of using the educulation as part of sports-for-all. The Plaintiff’s act of using the educulation for the educulation for the purpose of causing excessive educulation immediately after the occurrence of the instant event is difficult to be seen as having occurred during the educulation.

2) Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case, based on the premise that the Defendant intentionally, in the following behind the Plaintiff, etc., had an obvious anti-violation conduct, which is deep toward the right side of the Plaintiff’s right side, is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.