A. In the first instance court, the Plaintiff claimed for the payment of damages against the Defendant (i.e., KRW 117,147,693 consolation money of KRW 24,00,000) and damages for delay against the Defendant. The first instance court accepted the Plaintiff’s claim of KRW 125,323,494 (i.e., KRW 105,323,494 consolation money of KRW 20,000), and damages for delay, and dismissed the remainder of the claim.

As to the judgment of the court of first instance, the Defendant appealed to the effect that “the occurrence of the instant accident is the Plaintiff’s negligence, and thus, the Defendant’s responsibility should be partially limited.” The court of first instance prior to remand accepted part of the Defendant’s appeal and recognized the Plaintiff’s negligence as 10%, and rendered a judgment revoking the part against the Defendant, which exceeds the damages of KRW 113,307,329 (i.e., property damage KRW 93,307,329), and damages for delay.

Accordingly, the Defendant appealed against the part of the above judgment on the ground that “ despite the recognition of the Plaintiff’s negligence as 10%, the Defendant erred in calculating the amount of deduction corresponding to the Plaintiff’s percentage of negligence among the medical expenses already paid by the Defendant.” The Plaintiff appealed against the part relating to the litigation costs in the above judgment.

The Supreme Court has accepted the defendant's appeal and reversed the part against the defendant as to property damage in the judgment of the party before remand, and the plaintiff's incidental appeal was dismissed.

B. The final and conclusive part and the scope of the judgment of this court, i.e., the part concerning the Plaintiff’s claim for consolation money, i.e., the part concerning the Plaintiff’s claim for consolation money, other than the part concerning the Plaintiff’s property damage claim, is excluded from the scope of the judgment of the party members, and thus, this court shall

2. Basic facts

(a) the defendant;