손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. Quotation of the first instance judgment
A. The grounds for appeal by the Plaintiff do not differ significantly from the allegations in the first instance court, except for those emphasizing the following claims, and even if each evidence submitted in the first instance court is presented to this court, the Plaintiff’s actual income for 21 days for the expected treatment period of the Plaintiff is acknowledged. Accordingly, the Defendant’s scope of liability is limited to 90%, and the fact-finding and judgment by the first instance court, which calculated consolation money of KRW 4,00,000,000, in consideration of all the circumstances revealed in the pleading process, such as the background of tort, the Plaintiff’s age and gender, the part and degree of the subsequent disability, and the hospitalization period.
B. Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: "six months" of the second 8th class of the judgment of the court of first instance is "six months of imprisonment; "18,890,026 won" of the third 21,22 class (the first 8,584,880 won for future treatment costs of KRW 8,530,874,038); "18,890,026 won (the first 9,584,880 won for future treatment costs of KRW 8,530,00 for future treatment costs of KRW 8,530,00 for future treatment costs of KRW 8,530,00 for KRW 2,874,00 for the first 4,00 for the first 22nd class; the first 4,530% of the judgment of the court of first instance and the first 5% judgment concerning the existence or scope of the obligation to perform;" the second 5% judgment of the judgment and the first 15% of the judgment as follows.
2. Additional determination
A. Determination 1 on the period for calculating the actual income: (a) the Plaintiff received hospitalized treatment for 44 days from June 16, 2016 to July 29, 2016; (b) the Plaintiff was unable to perform his/her duties at all until August 2016, since he/she received outpatient treatment during the period of discharge; and (c) the Plaintiff was unable to perform his/her duties at least until the end of August 2016, deeming that at least 60 days that he/she was actually unable to perform his/her duties to be entirely incapable