1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) and the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) expanded from each appeal and the trial of the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff).

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as stated in the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows 2. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

2. From March 12, 2008 to February 2, 2017, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, 2nd 12-13, “payment of the sum of KRW 55,788,600 to the hospital treated by the Defendant shall be made by paying the sum of the treatment costs to the hospital treated by the Defendant from March 12, 2008 to September 15, 2017 (except for KRW 1,864,100,00 in total of the treatment costs incurred in the six months from the date of the instant accident).”

In the second sentence of the first instance judgment, the statement in Gap evidence 5-2, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, 1, and 2 of Eul evidence 5-2 shall be written as follows: "No dispute exists," Gap evidence 5-1, 2, 3, 8-1, 2, 8-2, 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings."

The part of the judgment of the court of first instance, 2 pages 17 and below, "A. Plaintiff's assertion", shall be raised as follows.

A person shall be appointed.

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff paid the medical expenses of the defendant due to the accident of this case. The defendant had been suffering from scarcitys, knee scarcosium, melting, high blood pressure, scarkes, scarke cells, fiber cell disability shoulder, old scarkes, etc. The defendant's injury suffered due to the accident of this case is limited to the part outside the prison, and the treatment is completed within 6 months. Thus, among the money paid by the plaintiff due to medical expenses, 6,373,650 won, excluding 1,864,100 won paid to the defendant's remaining outside the prison and the medical expenses for 6 months from the date of the accident of this case, was only for the treatment of the defendant's scokes as above, not for the treatment of the injury caused by the accident of this case, and thus, the defendant is obligated to return the above money to the plaintiff.

A person shall be appointed.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff .