1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning for this part of the court’s holding that the facts of recognition and the occurrence of liability for damages are identical to the corresponding column of the judgment of the court of first instance (as stated in the second to third class 8), and thus, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(Generally considering the circumstances alleged in the trial by the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the lower court’s first instance judgment, which calculated the Defendant’s liability ratio by 75% and 25%, with respect to the occurrence of the instant accident and the expansion of damages, is justifiable). 2. Scope of liability for damages

A. 1) For the convenience of calculating the amount of lost income, the period shall be calculated on a monthly basis, and the amount less than the month shall be counted on the side in which the appraised amount is less than the month, and the amount less than the last month and less than the last won shall be discarded. The current price calculation shall be calculated at the present price at the time of the instant accident in accordance with the simple discount method that deducts intermediary interest at the rate of 5/12 per month. The number of fys shall be calculated at the fourth decimal place. A) The number of days of birth, such as the Plaintiff’s personal information, shall be excluded from the parties’ assertion. A) The date of birth of a student: The date of the instant accident: The age of 41 years and 3 months as of August 14, 2014: The date of the date of completion of hospital daily wage: The date of completion of hospital treatment on August 28, 2014; the date of expiration of hospital treatment until the date of expiration of the first 30:00 on March 238, 2015.

B. With respect to the period from August 14, 2014 to the 28th day of the same month, the rate of loss of labor ability by 100% is reasonable.

Meanwhile, in full view of the facts acknowledged earlier and the result of the commission of physical examination to the C Hospital Head of the first instance court, the fact-finding inquiry, reply results, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff is a disability fixed at 0.02 of the left eye of the instant accident.