손해배상(자)
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.
1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except that the defendant additionally paid to the court of first instance is used or added, taking into account the medical expenses, damages, etc. that the defendant additionally paid to the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of
2. A calculation table of the amount of damages attached to the 10th judgment of the first instance court which is used or added shall be replaced by the calculation table of the amount of damages attached to this judgment;
The first instance court's judgment Nos. 6 through 9 and 15 of the same page "for the first time disbursement on April 28, 2017, which is the day following the date of the closing of argument in this case" shall be written as "for the first time disbursement on March 9, 2018, which is the day following the date of the closing of argument in this case, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the amount was spent as medical expenses by March 8, 2018, which is the day of the closing of argument in the trial," and the table at the bottom of the same face shall be deleted.
On the last day of the judgment of the first instance court, the following shall be added:
【3) The defendant asserts that in calculating the opening cost, the contribution ratio of the king should be taken into account.
If the degree of contribution of the king is recognized in calculating the loss of labor ability to calculate the loss of lost income, the degree of contribution of the king should be taken into account in calculating the opening expenses.
However, in the case of this case, the following circumstances, which are comprehensively considered based on the above circumstances and the evidence revealed earlier, i.e., ① the above delay failure of the Plaintiff’s king is merely the degree of 15% labor ability loss rate, and the Plaintiff was engaged in agriculture prior to the instant accident, and was on a bicycle at the time of the instant accident, and ② the appraiser of the first instance trial (F) considered the degree of contribution to the Plaintiff’s symptoms as the Plaintiff’s military register as being 10% if determined based on the diagnosis document, and ③.