1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and all pleadings, the defendant, around 20:10 on August 20, 2015, was found to have inflicted an injury on the plaintiff, by taking into account the plaintiff's face and head part of the plaintiff who was detained in the same room from 2:10 on the same room, Dong-dong, Seoul, Dong-dong, Seoul, and taking into account the plaintiff's face and head part of Dong-dong, 2:14 on the same room. Thus, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages caused by the above assault.

2. Scope of liability for damages

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) due to the Defendant’s assault and insult, the Plaintiff partly saw two of the dental children; (b) one of them changed; and (c) one of them was killed; (d) so, the Defendant sought payment of compensation for damages, such as medical expenses for the four parts of the said dentalian, and damages for lost income from permanent disorder; (b) KRW 10 million in total; and (c) KRW 5 million in total as compensation for emotional distress incurred by the Plaintiff due to the Defendant’s assault and insult (i.e., medical expenses, etc.; KRW 15 million in compensation for damages; and (d) KRW 5 million in compensation for damages (i.e., five million in compensation for damages, such as medical expenses) and damages for delay as described in the purport of the claim.

B. According to the overall purport of the records and arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 5 for treatment costs and future treatment costs, the defendant's assault committed by the defendant that the plaintiff suffered an injury in which one of the 26 dental services was sealed, and that one of the above dental services was 700,000 won (i.e., KRW 25, KRW 260, KRW 1400,000 for the treatment of the above dental services (i.e., KRW 25, KRW 266, KRW 1400,00). However, considering the evidence submitted by the plaintiff as a result of each of the above evidence, it is insufficient to recognize the fact that two of the plaintiff's dental services were partially saved or one of them was changed, or that there was no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

However, according to the above evidence and the purport of the whole argument, the plaintiff is originally aware of the defendant's assault.