손해배상(기)
1. The judgment of the first instance, including the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff)’s counterclaim extended by this court, is as follows.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. On July 24, 2015, the Defendant: (a) inflicted an injury upon the Plaintiff by drinking alcohol and Aluminum pipes, etc.; (b) destroyed the mobile phone and the diameter of the Plaintiff’s mobile phone owned by the Plaintiff (special injury); (c) on the same day, the Plaintiff, when drinking the Defendant on the same day, inflicted an injury upon the Defendant requiring approximately two weeks of medical treatment (influence), and damaged e-mails and shoes owned by the Defendant (special intimidation) by threatening the Defendant (influence) by taking care of the Defendant on the same day.
(Destruction and Damage to Property).
The Plaintiff and the Defendant are as listed in the separate facts of the crime.
In the Suwon District Court on June 30, 2016, the Plaintiff was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1,000,000, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment of KRW 8 months, 2 years of suspended execution, and 120 hours of community service (U.S. District Court 2016Da1813), and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the principal lawsuit
A. The plaintiff's assertion against the defendant, 3,314,470 won (i.e., KRW 3,00,000,000 for consolation money due to the defendant's above special injury and damage to property, and KRW 254,470 for medical expenses of the plaintiff, and KRW 60,00 for light value (= KRW 3,000 for 254,470 for 254,00 for 60,000) and damages for delay.
B. According to each of the statements and arguments stated in Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 2 and the whole purport of the arguments and arguments, the plaintiff borrowed KRW 10,000 from the defendant who was six years old and older than the plaintiff, and the plaintiff failed to pay it, and the above dispute was commenced when the defendant asked the defendant to pay it by failing to do so, and the plaintiff threatened the defendant on the ground of the above wall, and the defendant's assertion to the same purport was not otherwise asserted.
2. The above criminal judgment.