beta
Text
1. Of the part against A of the judgment of the first instance, KRW 3,165,015 against the defendant among the part against A of the judgment of the first instance, and the part among them 2,003.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
(a)In full view of the facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, and 8, the following facts may be acknowledged:
The net B was the security guard of the apartment apartment G in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, and the plaintiff A is the management engineer of the apartment, and the defendant is the resident of the apartment.
On June 8, 2014, the network B discovered that the Defendant’s vehicle was parked in India and demanded the Defendant to move the vehicle by posting the phone.
Accordingly, the defendant, who was in fired, assaulted the net B by putting the head against the floor by cutting off the net B, and caused the net B to suffer injuries, such as the impairment of the sprinke, the sprinke, the sprinke, the sprinke, the sprinke, etc.
In addition, the Defendant committed assault against the net B, such as flabing the Plaintiff A’s flab, pushing with flab and drinking flab, and flabing the chest and flab. As a result, the Plaintiff A suffered injury, such as a multi-fladry fladry, fladum, and tension, which require treatment for about three weeks.
B. According to the above facts, the defendant is liable to compensate for damages caused by the injury to the deceased B and the plaintiff A.
2. Scope of liability for damages
A. According to the statement 1 to 5 of the evidence 9-1 to 9-5 of the Plaintiff A, the Plaintiff can be acknowledged that the Plaintiff incurred KRW 1,161,965 in total for hospitalization and medical expenses due to the instant injury (in the case of the evidence 9-1 to 3, and 5, there are overlapping medical expenses, and the total amount of the medical expenses at the Plaintiff’s H hospital is KRW 1,058,755.
(2) Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of evidence Nos. 7, 8, and 9-1 through 5, and 10, Plaintiff A was hospitalized in the hospital on June 2014 due to the instant injury and did not work normally during that period, and Plaintiff A was paid KRW 1,971,360 as salary on May 201, while Plaintiff A was paid KRW 1,971,360 as salary on June 2014.