손해배상
Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the order to pay below shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Facts of recognition
The reasons for this part are as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, and this part of this Court is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of recognition of the liability for damages, the defendant is liable to compensate the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the act of causing the plaintiff's next injury.
B. According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1) 3 and 7, according to the purport of the whole statement and arguments, the plaintiff suffered from fingers and dubsium in the defendant's act of injuring the defendant on May 9, 2018, and received medical treatment such as having been conducted a radiation inspection at the hospital on May 11, 2018 with the permission of a detention house, and having received a prescription. Accordingly, the plaintiff paid KRW 114,00,00 for medical expenses and medical expenses, KRW 2,200, and KRW 116,200.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiff for 116,200 won of medical expenses.
B) The Plaintiff asserts that, due to the Defendant’s act of injury, KRW 600,000,000,000,000,000,000 for medical treatment expenses under long-term medical treatment, such as a sense of shame, insult, stress, reduction of leuk blood transfusion, influora, depression, disguised infection, and infection, etc., should be borne more than KRW 5,081,20,00 for mental and medical treatment expenses in the future, the Defendant should compensate for the total of KRW 1,11,00,00. However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff at the first instance and the trial alone alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the remainder of the medical treatment records asserted by the Plaintiff was for treating the Plaintiff’s wife or disease caused by the Defendant’s injury, and there is no evidence to acknowledge
According to Gap evidence Nos. 7 and 9, the plaintiff was undergoing a multiple inspection before the defendant's injury was inflicted on the plaintiff, and the plaintiff was complained of for a decrease in the weight of body, brusium, and two copies.