The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1,049,140 won with 5% interest per annum from March 18, 2008 to February 19, 2009, and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. The defendant's remaining appeal is dismissed.

3. The 10% of the total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and 90% by the Defendant, respectively.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1,200,000 won with 20% interest per annum from the day following the delivery day of the purport of the claim of this case and the copy of the application for change of cause to the day of complete payment.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

A. On August 28, 2007, the Plaintiff driven a car with low engine (vehicle number omitted) owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “victimd vehicle”) and proceeded to the same academic area near the Yongwon located in the Daejeon Pungdong-gu. On the other hand, the Plaintiff was involved in an accident where the golf machine, which the Nonparty left a golf course outside of the golf course, was faced by a customer Nonparty, and was faced with a glass window behind the driver’s seat of the damaged vehicle (hereinafter “the instant accident”), and caused the injury of the bones, tension, etc. due to the said accident, and the glass of the damaged vehicle was destroyed.

B. The above golf course is located adjacent to the eight-lane road in which the instant accident occurred as the place operated by the Defendant, and is installed only with an adequate height between roads and golf courses, and the same type of accident as the instant accident occurs.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence, Gap 4-1 to 4, the purpose of the whole pleading, video, and oral argument

2. Determination:

(a) Occurrence of liability for damages;

According to the above facts, the defendant who operates the above golf course has to install sufficient fences between the road in which the accident of this case occurred and the golf course users are not out of the golf course, despite the fact that the golf course users are not out of the golf course, there is negligence not taking such appropriate measures as above.

Therefore, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for all damages incurred by the instant accident.

(b) Scope of damages;

(1) Active damages

According to the statements in Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Gap evidence 4-1, 5, and Gap evidence 7-1 through 3, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff paid KRW 236,610 with the repair cost of the damaged vehicle, KRW 396,30 with the rental fee of other vehicles during the repair period (three days), KRW 116,200 with the medical expenses ( KRW 19,100 + + KRW 26,800 + KRW 70,300).

(2) Consolation money

Considering the Plaintiff’s age, the details and result of the instant accident, the injury part and degree, and other various circumstances shown in the pleadings of the instant case, it is reasonable to determine KRW 300,000,000.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 1,049,140 won (property damage 749,140 won + solatium 300,000 won) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from March 18, 2008 to February 19, 2009, which is the day following the day of service of a copy of the application for modification of the purport of the claim of this case and the cause of this case, as requested by the plaintiff, from March 18, 2008 to February 19, 2009, which is the day of decision of the court of first instance, to the day of full payment, to the day of full payment.

3. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is partially unfair with the conclusion, the part against the defendant who accepted the defendant's appeal and ordered payment in excess of the above cited money shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed, and the defendant's remaining appeal shall be dismissed as it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Full-time (Presiding Judge)