1. The Defendant’s KRW 64,534,094 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from January 5, 2016 to March 26, 2019.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 5, 2016, the Plaintiff was able to sit in a table table to the instant restaurant located in Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, the Defendant’s operation, and was eating and drinking. However, in order for an employee of the said restaurant (hereinafter “responding person”) to bring about the string of the Plaintiff’s head to the table, the gate in the vicinity of the table was used in the direction of the perpetrator, and the offender’s gate was put into the Plaintiff with heavy national water that was put in the wind of the perpetrator.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.

In the instant accident, the Plaintiff suffered serious 2 rupture 12 colons on the left-hand side, the water department, and the left-hand side of the water unit, which require approximately 12 weeks of treatment.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 4, 6 (including evidence number), Eul evidence 1, video, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above basic facts as to the occurrence of liability for damages and the limitation of liability, in a case where a restaurant employee transports hot foods, he/she has a duty to pay attention to prevent the occurrence of food until the transport is completed, and even though he/she has a duty to pay attention to customers, he/she has a duty to prevent the accident by attracting attention, he/she was negligent in performing his/her duty of care, such as transporting the food in one hand and transporting the plaintiff's head, and not taking any measures to the plaintiff during transport, and thus the accident in this case occurred, and the defendant who is a restaurant owner has neglected his/her duty to conduct safety education to employees, etc. in preparation for such safety accident. Accordingly, pursuant to Article 756 of the Civil Act, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages

On the other hand, the circumstances that the defendant was difficult for customers, including the plaintiff and the plaintiff juncing, to anticipate, such as excessively unsatisfing clothes in the clothes, and satisfing the clothes toward the perpetrator, are also causing some of the occurrence of the accident of this case.