beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the amount ordered below.
Reasons
A. In the case of injury-disease compensation annuities within the scope of medical expenses corresponding to the affirmative injury of the victim, nursing benefits may be claimed within the scope of nursing expenses corresponding to the affirmative injury of the victim in the case of injury-disease compensation annuities, within the scope of the amount of loss of lost income corresponding to the period of treatment in the case of injury-disease compensation annuities, and within the scope of the amount of loss of lost income corresponding to the passive injury of the victim corresponding to the period of suspension after the period of suspension
B) Accordingly, the specific amount that the Plaintiff can claim to the Defendant is as listed below. The amount of injury-disease compensation annuity of KRW 5,196,730,730, KRW 711,625, 5,196,730, KRW 92,57,57,265, KRW 157,46,444, KRW 92,57,265, positive injury-disease benefits of KRW 5,370,870, KRW 11,513,830,870, KRW 5,370,890, KRW 1,554,890, KRW 1,54,890, KRW 79, KRW 75,757, KRW 7467, KRW 7547, KRW 1057, KRW 7539, KRW 75365, KRW 75365, KRW 37565, KRW 7539, KRW 75365365, KRW 75365, etc.
3. Conclusion
A. Ultimately, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated by the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from April 4, 2014 that the Defendant claims against the Plaintiff as of the date of payment of each insurance benefit, to November 26, 2015, which is the date of the imposition of a reasonable judgment, and 20% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date of full payment.
B. If so, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as there is no ground. Among the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the above amount of recognition is unfair. Thus, the defendant's claim is unfair.