A. At around 23:55 on July 23, 2014, Defendant B, who had a horse dispute with the Plaintiff on the frontway of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, was able to hear the Plaintiff’s bath at a nearby main shop, and was able to walk the Plaintiff’s body part of the left head once, and Defendant C was able to walk the part of the Plaintiff’s body part of the Plaintiff’s body, and Defendant C was able to gather an empty cans to the Plaintiff by combining it.

B. The plaintiff is the defendants' above A.

The assault, like the paragraph, has suffered injury to the superior in the open part of the head, which requires approximately four weeks of treatment.

C. Accordingly, Defendant B was indicted on October 27, 2014 by violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a deadly weapon, etc.), and Defendant C was subject to the suspension of indictment on the same crime on December 1, 2014.

[Defendant B: Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act): [Defendant C: Facts without dispute, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the facts of recognition of liability for damages (1) the Defendants jointly assaulted the Plaintiff and inflicted injury on the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendants are jointly liable for damages incurred by the Plaintiff as joint tortfeasor.

(2) Set-off of negligence with limitation of liability: 30% ( Taking into account the fact that the plaintiff first takes a bath and leads to fighting).

B. (1) Scope of liability for damages: (a) Wangl treatment cost of KRW 1,017,464 (=1,453,520 x 0.7) (2) damage of KRW 1,649,653 (i.e., Urban Daily Wage in 2014) (i., 84,166 x 28 days x 0.7) the Plaintiff alleged that he/she had earned income of KRW 140,157 per day as a place of steel, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

(3) Condolence five million won (in consideration of the circumstances in which the plaintiff suffered the injury, degree of injury, etc.) [the ground for recognition: the fact that no dispute is raised, evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5 of the evidence No. 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings];

C. Accordingly, the defendants jointly do so to the plaintiff 7,667,117.