1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. 원고의 주장 원고가 2018. 6. 20. 7시경 피고 운영의 쌈밥식당에서 식사를 하다가 돌을 씹어 보철물 파절 및 상실의 피해를 입어, 치료비 16,400원을 지출하였고, 향후 보철물 재제작을 위하여 330만원이 필요하다.

Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the above treatment costs and future treatment costs and consolation money to the plaintiff.

2. The judgment is not sufficient to recognize the Plaintiff’s damage caused by the Plaintiff’s booming and loss of booming steel products at the restaurant operated by the Defendant, solely on the statement of evidence Nos. 3 through 5, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

[Plaintiff asserted that he she sweeded a breath of rice, and reversed his statement from the Defendant to the effect that he did not swelthm rice, which he sweld to the effect that he sweld from the Defendant. When he discontinued food, etc., he did not find any stone, etc. in the suspension, and he argued that he swelds sweld and sweld were attached to it, because he sweld as he sweld in water as water. If he sweld a sweld, it seems that swelds and sweld in the suspension, and that it is difficult to believe that he sweld up a swelth of food. The plaintiff's swelth of the swelth of the swelth of rice, which the plaintiff's swelded corresponds to the right-hand swelth of rice, which is not the possibility of the plaintiff's right-hand treatment in the next process.

Some of the fire fighting materials from the right to the right to the end of the ice was cut.

Even if it is not possible to see that it is necessary to re-production the remainder of the re-production, and if the re-production of the six visible steel products is recognized, not only it would be damaged in the Chewing process, but also the number of six visible steel products.