손해배상(기)
Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revocation shall be dismissed.
The process of litigation and the scope of this Court’s adjudication on the Plaintiff’s father He (hereinafter “the deceased”) did not appeal against the second judgment that the Defendant’s employees B (hereinafter “B”) dismissed the claim for damages against the Deceased’s B, and thus, the claim against the Deceased’s B against the deceased was determined to have been lost.
The deceased’s deposit account (hereinafter “the deposit of this case”) was opened without due process of identification, etc., and the deceased suffered damages of KRW 500 million, and the Defendant sought compensation for damages due to tort and compensation for delay damages.
The judgment of the court of first instance recognized the defendant's liability for damages, but limited its liability to 50%, and ordered the defendant to compensate for the amount of KRW 250 million and damages for delay.
The Defendant appealed against the above judgment, and the first judgment prior to the remanding of the case is reasonable to limit the Defendant’s liability for damages to 40% of the total amount of damages, and thus, the part against the Defendant ordering the Plaintiff to pay more than KRW 200 million and damages for delay thereof was revoked and the Plaintiff’s claim corresponding to the revocation portion
The Defendant appealed against the judgment prior to the first remand. The first remand judgment reversed the part against the Defendant on the ground that “it is difficult to deem a proximate causal relationship between the negligence and the damage suffered by the Deceased, even if there is negligence on the part of the deceased, at the time of opening the instant deposit account, even if the deceased’s intention was not verified.”
In the second appellate trial prior to the remanding of the case, the deceased selected the claim for return of KRW 500 million upon the formation of the deposit contract, and the second appellate judgment prior to the remanding of the case, accepted the above claim for return of deposit and ordered the defendant to compensate for the damages incurred in delay.
a selective claim relationship.