A. The defendant is the company of the trade name D located in Busan Seo-gu C (hereinafter "the company of this case"), and the plaintiff was an employee of the company of this case.

B. On January 5, 2016, at around 01:00, the Defendant respondeded to the Plaintiff from the headline of the trade name, F located in Busan YE, to the point that the Plaintiff’s usual working attitude is not good. The Plaintiff heard these shocks, dried the Plaintiff’s balp, dried the balp, and dried the Plaintiff’s balp, dried the balp, and dried the balp with the Plaintiff’s balp, and inflicted injury on the left hand of the Plaintiff at the time of two 2 weeks of the Plaintiff’s left balp with the left hand balp, etc., which requires three weeks of treatment.

(hereinafter referred to as "the injury of this case". (c)

The Defendant was notified of the summary order of KRW 2,00,000 due to the instant injury by Busan District Court Decision 2016 High Court Decision 7158, and the said order became final and conclusive around that time.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 13, witness G's witness G's testimony, the purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the establishment of liability for damages, the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiff since the defendant inflicted damage on the plaintiff due to the tort, which is the injury of this case.

3. Determination on the scope of liability for damages

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff lost 5%’s labor ability due to the instant injury, and filed a claim for the amount of KRW 19,190,758 from January 5, 2016, which was the date of the accident, to December 29, 2031, from January 29, 201, for 191. [The Plaintiff: (a) the daily income of KRW 19,190,758 [the daily income of KRW 2,724,299 (the daily wage of KRW 89,566 x 365 ± 12 months in the latter part of the year of 2015 ± 365 ± 5%] 】 140.2912 (the call index in 191)];

According to the results of the physical examination and fact-finding (hereinafter “examination results”), it is recognized that the Plaintiff caused symptoms to the left-hand ear due to the injury of this case, but one must return.