The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant).

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the lower court determined that, in full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”)’s brain damage caused by the instant accident and underfluence damage, and that it is impossible to live alone in the state where the land price is worn out and food is deteriorated; and (b) it is reasonable to view that the Defendant requires two adult nursings per day during the life period from the date following the discharge from the middle-patient’s room.

In light of the records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or incomplete hearing as to the calculation of the opening cost as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, where the victim was negligent in the occurrence or expansion of damages or there is a ground to limit the tortfeasor's liability, this shall be taken into account in determining the scope of liability for damages. However, the fact-finding or determination of the ratio of comparative negligence or liability limitation grounds belongs to the exclusive authority of the fact-finding court unless the principle of equity is deemed to be significantly unreasonable

The judgment below

In light of the above legal principles and the records, the fact-finding and the judgment of the court below on the grounds for offsetting the negligence are not considerably unreasonable in light of the principle of equity, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence as to offsetting the negligence, or incomplete hearing, contrary to the allegations

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.