beta
Text
1. There is no liability for damages that the Plaintiff owes to the Defendant regarding the accident stated in the attached list.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a company operating B urban bus (hereinafter “instant bus”) and the Defendant is a passenger of the said bus.
B. At around 19:40 on March 27, 2014, C, a driver of the instant bus, stopped the instant bus for signal control at the 73-3 intersection of Gangseo-gu Seoul Airport, Gangseo-gu, Seoul, but started. The Defendant, while the instant bus was in front of the lower entrance of the instant bus, was at the center, and was rashed to go beyond the bottom of the floor (hereinafter “instant accident”). At the same time, C, a pole near the instant bus, was laid off (hereinafter “instant accident”).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2, result of verification by this court, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The party's assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant did not have a causal relationship with the accident of this case, and that the defendant did not have a duty to compensate for the medical expenses.
The defendant asserts to the effect that the plaintiff has a damage claim of KRW 12,85,280 ( KRW 7,35,310, KRW 519,00) on the ground that the plaintiff has a duty to pay consolation money of KRW 5,00,00, since the plaintiff has a duty to pay consolation money of KRW 5,000 ( KRW 7,35,310, KRW 519,000) on the ground that the plaintiff has a duty to pay consolation money of KRW 12,85,280 ( KRW 5,000, KRW 519,00,000) on the ground that the plaintiff suffered injuries, such as trend and sacity, and paid KRW 7,35,310, KRW 5,00,00,
B. In full view of each of the statements in the evidence Nos. 9 through 19 (including a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) of the judgment, the fact that the Defendant spent KRW 51,790 in total with medicine expenses and medical expenses, etc. as stated in the expenditure records, such as attached medical expenses, from April 2, 2014 to January 12, 2015 after the instant accident, is recognized.
However, evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Nos. 1 through 8 are integrated into the purpose of the whole pleadings.