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 Defendant, at around 19:30 on October 3, 2015, was liable to compensate for damages, on the ground that the Plaintiff was pushed down with the Defendant’s wife in front of the D stores located in the Geum-gu Busan Metropolitan City, on the ground that the Plaintiff was pushed down with the Defendant’s wife in order to drive up the Defendant’s work in front of the Defendant’s work, and that the Defendant was not in dispute between the parties, or that the Defendant committed assault by having the Plaintiff’s breast part of the Plaintiff’s chest by being pushed up three times with the Defendant’s hand during the Plaintiff and the Sinb, and that it was recognized by comprehensively taking account of the entries in subparagraphs 1 through 8, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to do so with money for mental suffering suffered by the plaintiff due to the assault of this case.

2. The amount of consolation money to be paid by the Defendant shall be KRW 300,000, considering all the circumstances indicated in the records of the instant case, such as the relationship, age, background of the instant assault, method and degree of the Defendant’s assault, damage inflicted upon the Plaintiff, and the result of the relevant criminal case.

[On the other hand, according to the evidence evidence No. 2, the defendant is found to have deposited the deposited person with the deposited person as the plaintiff on February 15, 2019, which was after the judgment of the court of first instance, with the deposited person as the plaintiff on February 15, 2019 (the principal amount of KRW 300,000, interest 52,601). However, deposit based on the judgment of the court of first instance is not the original repayment deposit which is not the final repayment deposit which is extinguished by the judgment of the court of first instance, but it is merely the effect of repayment under the condition that the provisional execution declaration or the judgment of the principal is revoked by the appellate court. Thus, even if the defendant paid the amount of provisional execution by the judgment of the court of first instance pursuant to the judgment of the court of first instance, the appellate court shall decide the propriety of the relevant claim without considering it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 93Da26175, 26182, Oct. 8, 199).