beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 5,154,270; and (b) KRW 2,000,000 to Plaintiff B; and (c) each of them, from April 1, 2017 to June 30, 2017.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. The facts of recognition (1) The Defendant married on April 27, 201 and divorced on July 21, 2015 after the marriage of the Plaintiff A’s husband’s husband and wife, and Plaintiff B is the father and wife of Plaintiff A.
(2) On January 3, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 10:40, the Defendant: (b) brought to the Plaintiffs in front of the Plaintiff, who was on the back of the Plaintiff, while making a divorce proceeding, on the ground that D, who tried to move by leaving the E Apartment 103 and 2801 in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, the Defendant would go to the Defendant; (c) put the Plaintiffs in front of the Plaintiff while carrying out a horse fighting with D and the Defendant’s horse fighting; (d) pushed the Plaintiff into the front line; (d) was tightly pushed back the Plaintiff’s breath’s breath, which did not want to go to go to the Plaintiff; and (e) led the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff, who was in pregnancy, brought the Plaintiff at the front line of the Plaintiff’s cell phone, and b) took the part of the Plaintiff’s mobile phone recording the Plaintiff’s mobile phone by taking the Defendant’s mobile phone.
[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 5 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiffs for damages caused by the tort.
(In addition to the above facts, the Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant had threatened, insulting, and detained the Plaintiff. However, it is not sufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 3-1 only, and there is no other evidence to prove the fact that the Defendant threatened, insulting, and detained the Plaintiff). 2. The scope of the Defendant’s liability for damages
A. The part dismissing Plaintiff A’s medical expenses: KRW 154,270 (based on recognition) as stated in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings (2) as to consolation money: KRW 5,000,000 (3): it is difficult to view that the cost of the written complaint is a property damage in proximate causal relation with the Defendant’s tort.
B. Plaintiff B (1) consolation money: the part dismissing KRW 2,00,000 (2): KRW 836,000 due to the damage of a mobile phone.