beta
Text
The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul Southern District Court Panel Division.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. The court below acknowledged the fact that, following the occurrence of the accident in this case, after the occurrence of the accident in question, the victim suffered injury to the external side of the essule, the external side of the esule, the first half of the esule, the first half of the esule, the first half of the esule, the first half of the esule, the first half of the esule, the first half of the esule, and the second half of the esule, the first half of the esule, the second of the esule.g., the second of the accident in this case, and the second of the esule, the second of the esule taken on April 7, 2009, the esule claimed that the esule conducted the second half of the esule in the first half of the esule on the esule.
In addition, considering the fact of recognition and the fact that there is a high probability that the victim was shocked of the friendly part due to the accident of this case, there was a proximate causal link between the accident of this case and the injury of the victim, the accident of this case and the injury of the victim, the outer half of the friendly part of the friendly part of the friendly part of the friendly part of the friendly part.
2. However, the lower court’s determination is difficult to accept for the following reasons.
(1) According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the reasoning of the first instance judgment as cited by the lower court, and the record, the following facts are revealed: (a) the reading check for the MRI test on April 1, 2009, attached to the medical record of the G TI test by a member of the G TI test; (b) the inspection report for the MRI test by a university hospital on September 8, 2009 states that “the continuity of the GI test and the intensity of signal are maintained”; and (c) the medical record appraisal report by the first instance court on September 8, 2009 maintained the shape of the GI team; and (d) the image and medical record submitted “the image and medical record without objective opinion of the MRI,” in which there is no possibility of the MRI from the GI test, but there is no possibility of the MRI to know the state of the MRI’s operation before the operation.”