구상금
1. The defendants' appeal against the plaintiff is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
purport, purport, and.
1. The reasoning for this part of the lower court’s reasoning is as follows: (a) 3 pages 2-5 of the judgment of the first instance, except that “H, who was on board the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident, suffered injury, such as a pellley, analone, etc., and received surgery,” is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance; (b) thus, this part shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the
2. Determination
A. According to the fact that the Defendants’ liability for damages was established, Defendant B is the driver of the Defendant vehicle, and the Defendant C is jointly liable for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) due to the instant accident as an operator who owns the Defendant vehicle.
B. Determination 1 as to the Intervenor’s occurrence of damages) The Intervenor’s assertion did not actually suffered significant obstacles, such as the name, etc. of the Republic of Korea. Even if there was such impediment from the foregoing perspective, there was no causal relationship with the instant accident. (A) The Intervenor received surgery treatment by suffering from injury, such as thalone and alone, due to the instant accident, as seen earlier. In addition, considering the result of the appraisal commission to the Director of the J Hospital of this Court (as of June 25, 2018) and the entire arguments, the Intervenor applied the face to the Hospital of North Korea on July 27, 2014, which was the date of the instant accident, at the time of the instant accident; (b) the Intervenor claimed that there was a possibility of the Plaintiff’s medical record; (c) according to the medical record at the time, the Intervenor entered the surgery on both sides, e.g., e., e., e., e., e., e., external surgery and 1., e., 20., py surgery.