1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.
On August 12, 2013, 09:30, Suwon-si, Suwon-si C'D 'D Dogna'.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts and
2. The grounds for this part of the parties’ assertion are as follows: (a) the Defendant’s 4th three parallels in the first instance judgment “Defendant” shall be deemed to be “Plaintiff”; (b) the Plaintiff’s 4th parallels and four parallels “Defendant” shall be deemed to be “Defendant”; and (c) “16,320,760 won” in the fourth five parallels in “16,430,760 won” shall be deemed to be the corresponding part of the first instance judgment; and (d) therefore, they shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
(a) Occurrence and occurrence of liability for damages;
B. The grounds for this part of the court’s limitation on liability for damages are as follows: (a) the Defendant’s “Defendant” in the fifth fifth five-party written judgment of the first instance is changed to “Plaintiff”; and (b) the Plaintiff in the sixth six-party written judgment is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance as “Defendant”; and (c) thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420
C. 1) In full view of the purport of the argument as a whole in light of the evidence No. 4, evidence No. 1 to No. 4, evidence No. 1 to No. 6, evidence No. 2, 3, 4, 7, and 9, evidence No. 6-1, and evidence No. 6-1, as a whole, the court of first instance rendered an order to submit documents to the regional headquarters of the National Health Insurance Corporation (the National Health Insurance Corporation) by the court of first instance for the treatment (including rehabilitation treatment) of the instant accident, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Defendant sustained injury, such as the outer side duplicating duplicating, etc. on the left side, and the Defendant incurred KRW 6,759,305 in total
However, the part exceeding the above recognized part (the part of Eul evidence 6-1, Eul evidence 6-5, 6, 8, 10, Eul evidence 9, Eul evidence 10-2, 4, 5, and 6) was treated by the defendant through a usual pain, etc., and it is difficult to recognize a proximate causal relation between the treatment and the accident of this case in light of the part and degree of the injury suffered by the defendant in the accident of this case, the period of treatment, and the date of treatment of each of the above evidence.
In summary, it is recognized in the first instance court.