1. The Defendant’s KRW 3,236,363 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from May 28, 2015 to May 12, 2016, and the next day.

1. Basic facts

A. At around 11:50 on May 28, 2015, the Plaintiff assaulted the Defendant, on the ground that the Defendant, who works as the above apartment security guard in front of the Tongdong Management Office, mispercing the Plaintiff, was unable to park and the other vehicle was parked. As such, the Plaintiff committed assault against the Defendant, such as “Chewing string”, and 2-3 times the Defendant’s flapsing breath, booming the Defendant’s flaps and photographing the face with the hand floor.

B. As above, the Defendant suffered violence from the Plaintiff, against the Plaintiff’s act, received once a part of the Plaintiff’s fluence, thereby causing injury to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant injury”). Around 4 weeks of treatment, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the right side of the fluence that requires treatment of the Plaintiff.

C. The Plaintiff and the Defendant did not want to be punished for the above assault and the injury of this case, and the prosecutor of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office of the branch office

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. According to the facts acknowledged earlier, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages suffered by the Plaintiff due to the instant injury.

B. According to the following circumstances indicated in the records on limitation of liability for damages, namely, that the instant case was caused by a mistake in parking in the apartment in which the Plaintiff works for the Defendant, and that according to the witness D’s statement after witness witness witnessing the process of the instant bodily injury, the Plaintiff appears to have first expressed a desire to the Defendant and used violence, and that the Plaintiff had already been wearing an fright prior to the instant case, the Defendant’s liability for damages is limited to 30%.

3. Scope of liability for damages

A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. A. B. A. B. A. A. B. A. A. B. A. A. B. A. B. A. B. A.D.