보험금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: ① actively damaged expenses for hearing aids in the items of "injury" in the 6th 14th 17th 6th 6th 17th 6th 6th 17th 17th 7th 7th 15th 2th below; ② 439,341,213th 43th 43th 8th 17th 8th 17th "4,697,341,213th 43th 43th 17th 17th 8th 19th 8th 19th 19th 339,41,213th 19th 19th 20th 20th 10th 20th 20th 30th 10th 20th 20th 20th 200th 3th 200th 3th 10th 30th 20.
2. The expenses for hearing aids among the expenses for active damage - treatment- expenses for hearing aids in the items of "injury" are also eligible for the insurance proceeds of this case. Thus, in case where the income loss rate applicable when the plaintiff did not wear the hearing aids as a result of physical appraisal and the rate of labor disability in the case of failing to use the hearing aids is different, the expenses for hearing aids can not be separately recognized as damages (see Supreme Court Decision 89Meu13612 delivered on May 22, 1990). The plaintiff's accident of this case caused each of the instant accidents, and if the plaintiff did not take into account the wearing of hearing aids, the rate of labor disability in accordance with the comprehensive appraisal of Mabloddrid disability is 64%, and the rate of labor disability in accordance with the appraisal of Maloddrid disability is 64%, and it is reasonable to recognize the plaintiff's insurance proceeds as being eligible for the insurance proceeds of this case as being determined separately from the fact that the labor disability rate of this case was 97%.
3. Additional determination
A. The defendant shall take precedence over others.