A. At around 18:00 on March 17, 2014, the Defendant received a claim from the Plaintiff that the right to landscape of the Plaintiff’s residence is infringed on due to the Defendant’s building, and assaulted the Plaintiff’s title by hand by hand during dialogue.

B. The defendant is the above A.

As a result of the act of this subsection, the Suwon District Court was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 300,000, which was sentenced to a fine of KRW 5831, and the above order was finalized.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole argument

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of recognition as above, the defendant's act of assaulting the plaintiff constitutes a tort against the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by his own tort.

B. The Plaintiff was an average of KRW 15,108,722 per month in the scope of liability for damages. However, from March 19, 2014 to March 19, 2014, the Plaintiff was subject to the instant assault by the Defendant.

4. Inasmuch as the Plaintiff was hospitalized for 18 days until May 18, 200, the Plaintiff sought compensation in the event of actual import loss of KRW 9,320,00. However, each statement of evidence Nos. 2 through 4, and 7 (including the serial number) is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the Plaintiff was hospitalized due to the Defendant’s assault, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, this part of the claim is without merit without examining the propriety of its amount.

2) Although the Plaintiff alleged that the instant medical expenses, the amount of hospitalization, and the amount of pharmaceutical value claimed that the Plaintiff incurred losses from each disbursement of KRW 2,389,120 in the treatment expenses and the amount of hospitalization expenses, and KRW 8,760 in the amount of pharmaceutical value, it is difficult to recognize that the Plaintiff sustained losses due to the Defendant’s assault, as seen above, the claim for consolation money does not need to further examine. 3) It is without merit that the Plaintiff suffered emotional distress due to the Defendant’s assault.