Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is as follows: ① The opinion of the court below is the result of the 4th day after the act of massage in this case was conducted, and it is difficult to conclude that the victim E was based on the act of massage of the defendant, not any other external factors, considering the treatment details or physical condition of the victim E; ② the opinion of the sum of 3, 4, 5, and 6 at the Gindomo Hospital on August 14, 2012 was added to 3, 4, 5, and 6 other than the above 11 days after the above 11th day after the date of this case, it is difficult to recognize that the defendant was guilty of the injury caused by the defendant's massage act; ③ The defendant did not have any excessive pressure or physical condition beyond the degree of his age, gender, etc. conducted by customers; and there is no evidence to deem the defendant guilty of the injury by occupational negligence on the ground that the defendant violated his duty of care.