손해배상(기)
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 6,116,353; and (b) KRW 500,000 and each of the said money to Plaintiff A; and (c) from March 29, 2015 to July 2016.
1. In full view of the respective descriptions and the purport of the whole arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, Gap evidence Nos. 12, Eul evidence Nos. 12, and Eul evidence Nos. 3 (including various numbers), the defendant injured the plaintiff on March 20, 2015, thereby causing bodily injury to the left-hand frame, etc. requiring approximately five weeks medical treatment, damaged the plaintiff's internal view during the course of assault, and the plaintiff Eul can recognize the fact that the plaintiff's mother is the plaintiff's mother. Thus, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiffs for the damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the above tort.
2. Scope of liability for damages
(a) Medical treatment costs: Each description of the evidence 6,904,810 won (based on recognition), evidence 4, evidence 5, evidence 7, and evidence 8 (including each number);
(b) Consideration: 400,000 won (based on recognition) A9;
C. On the basis of the Urban Wage in the second half of 2015, the daily income is calculated on the basis of KRW 87,805, since the Plaintiff A was a student again at the time of the instant assault and had no special income.
(2) From March 29, 2015 to April 14, 2015, the initial hospitalization period is from April 1, 2015 to the same month.
4. Until May (5), from April 7, 2015 to April 16, 2015 (10 days), or from April 7, 2015 to the aforementioned period for the convenience of calculation, the period of hospitalization from May 22, 2015 to May 23, 2015 (2 days) is deemed to have been hospitalized, and thus, the above period of hospitalization is excluded.
[Reasons for Recognition] Calculations. (3) of Evidence A 4-9 and evidence A5-3: 1,311,543 won (=87,805 won x 15 days x 0.958, and 0.958 won.
D. (1) Reasons for consolation money: The defendant unilaterally assaulted and inflicted an injury on the plaintiff A; the plaintiff A, who was preparing for university admission due to the assault of this case, seems to have suffered a considerable obstacle to his studies; the side and face of the injury and the need for supplementary treatment due to the decline of the infant who was interrupted after the treatment may arise; and the plaintiff A's age, the part and degree of injury, and the relation between the plaintiffs.