2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

purport.

A. The plaintiff (appointed party) and the appointed party C are married couple.

B. In the process of preventing the removal work performed by the Defendant on May 3, 2013 in Ansan-si, where the Appointor C suffered from assault by the Defendant, such as selling knife, and thereby suffering from dump and tensions of the parts of the hand that require approximately two weeks of medical treatment, and other grandchildren and losses.

(hereinafter “the instant injury”). C.

The Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Appointed C (hereinafter “Plaintiff, etc.”) filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for property damage, such as medical expenses incurred from the instant injury, actual income, and consolation money (Seoul District Court Branch Decision 2014Daso1489, 2014Gasoba291, hereinafter “previous lawsuit”). On September 30, 2014, the Defendant paid KRW 400,000 to the Appointed, and the Plaintiff, etc. renounced the main claim and the remainder of the main claim, and the Defendant gave up the counterclaim, and the conciliation was concluded to waive the counterclaim claim.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The claimant C of the plaintiff (Appointed Party) has received medical treatment in the hospital even after the conciliation in the previous lawsuit was completed.

Accordingly, the Selection C sought payment of the amount claimed in the sum of KRW 982,660, transportation expenses of KRW 500,000, and KRW 3,000,000,000, and KRW 4,482,660, and the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) sought payment of the amount claimed in the sum of KRW 4,482,660, and the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) suffered mental pain as the husband of the Selection C, thereby seeking payment of KRW 1

3. In light of the circumstance and degree of the instant injury, the period during which the conciliation was concluded in the previous litigation after five months from the date of the occurrence of the injury, and the fact that the period required for the prosecution of the injury and the observation of the progress is deemed to have already elapsed, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the subsequent disability caused by the instant injury has continued even after the conciliation was concluded.