2014 Gaz. 205861 (Counterclaim) Compensation for damages

Plaintiff:

Defendant

October 8, 2015

November 5, 2015

1. The counterclaim claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Counterclaim Plaintiff.

Counterclaim: 35,00,000 won to the counterclaim (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant")

For this, 5% per annum from March 23, 2014 to October 29, 2014, and 5% from the following day to the full payment.

By the day, 20% interest per annum shall be paid.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 23, 2014: around 00, 17: Sinsan-si Hayangyang-si ******* * * * In the course of the attack of the Plaintiff team, there was a field-gu competition between the camping team to which the Plaintiff belongs and the camping team to which the Defendant belongs. In the course of the attack of the Plaintiff team, the Defendant, three dusts, as three dusts, went beyond the course of the attacking and cutting down the air with a height of three dusts, and go beyond the direction of two to three dusts, and go towards the direction of two dusts.

B. At the time, the defendant was over kneeker on the left-hand side of the plaintiff who has come from 2 to 3 lux lux. Accordingly, the defendant suffered 'the full-time lux of the left-hand lux,' and 'the above accident' (hereinafter referred to as the "accident of this case").

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 (including Serial number), examination result of the plaintiff himself/herself, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

Since the accident of this case occurred due to the negligence of running a cover of a cover of a cover of the road in which the defendant paid three expenses for water, which was caused by the negligence of exceeding the cover of a cover of a cover of a cover of the road. Therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damage.

3. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. A. Since a participant in an athletic game may differ from other players due to his/her own act, he/she is obligated to exercise safety care, which is the duty of good faith to ensure the life or physical safety of other players, etc., in compliance with the athletic rules. However, a form of athletic game, such as decentralization or Taekwondo, where the price for a counter player is mainly formed, or where multiple players are engaged in physical contacts in one area, such as the axis or deaf-gu, in which the price for the counter player is mainly formed, there is a risk inherent in the athletic game itself, which is accompanied by physical contacts. A participant in the athletic game is at least at a certain degree and participating in the athletic game to the extent possible. Thus, whether a participant in such a type of athletic game fulfilled his/her duty of care above shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, such as the type and risk of the athletic game, the progress of the game, whether the parties concerned comply with the athletic rules, the nature and degree of violation of the rules, degree of injury, and degree of injury, etc., unless the act does not exceed social reasonableness (see, etc.).

B. While physical contact does not extend to the axis or the deaf-gu, physical contact is likely to occur in the course of attack, dust, and water expenses, and the risks of physical injury are inherent in the field. The same applies to the case where a camping area is occupied to build public order, concentrating on the spirit of the day-to-day public order when the camping area is occupied to build public order, it is difficult to determine the risk of collision with the main owner before it is occupied. It is difficult to expect that there is a danger of collision. It is difficult to view that the Defendant was aware that the Plaintiff’s kne, kne, leading the Defendant, going beyond the camping area, and it was difficult to view that the Defendant violated the regulations of the camping area solely on the basis of the fact that the Plaintiff’s act was committed with kne, and that the accident occurred in the time of the accident, such as the Plaintiff’s act was committed by the Defendant, and it is difficult to view that the Defendant did not have any legal duty of care in light of the fact that the accident was committed by the Plaintiff, and that it did not appear to the accident in this case.

C. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion is difficult to accept.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's counterclaim is dismissed for lack of reason.

Judges Park Jong-young

Judges Park Sung-sung

Judges Kim Dong-dong