1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) around 11:00 on March 3, 2015; (b) around 11:00 on March 10, 2015 by the Defendant’s wife C; and (c) around 11:0 on March 25, 2015 by the Defendant, respectively, assault each Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant should compensate the plaintiff for the expenses for medical treatment and issuance of a medical certificate KRW 237,170, KRW 3 million, KRW 3 million, and KRW 3 million.

2. Determination

A. We examine the occurrence of liability for damages, and there is no dispute between the parties, or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the fact that the Defendant was found to have taken the lower part of the Plaintiff’s title on March 25, 2015 with the upper part of the lower part of the pleadings.

However, it is not sufficient to recognize that the above Defendant committed an assault against each Plaintiff on March 3, 2015, and March 10, 2015 by the Defendant’s wife C merely with the descriptions of subparagraphs 7-2 and 3, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise, the Plaintiff’s allegation in this part is without merit.

B. According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 2 of 237,170 won positive damage 1) - the plaintiff paid KRW 237,170 with the expenses for treatment and issuance of a medical certificate due to the defendant's assault. 2) passive damage - It is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff suffered a loss equivalent to the lost income due to the defendant's assault, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

3. Consolation money - One million won shall be determined in consideration of the age, background, degree of violence, degree of injury, etc. of the plaintiff and the defendant.

C. Accordingly, according to the theory of litigation, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 1,237,170 as well as damages for delay calculated by the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from August 22, 2015 following the delivery of the complaint of this case sought by the Plaintiff from August 22, 2015 to the sentencing date of the court of first instance, which is the date of the judgment of the court of first instance, to May 26, 2016, and from the next day to the date of full payment, to the day of full payment.

3. Conclusion.