1. At the trial of the party, the Plaintiff’s successor’s motion to reduce the purport of the claim and the participation of an independent party intervenor shall be filed.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance regarding the instant case is that the court below rejected each of the statements No. 27-1 and No. 2, which are insufficient to acknowledge the plaintiffs' assertion on the ratio of negligence, and except where the plaintiffs use or add a part as follows, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. A statement of calculation of the amount of damages in the attached Form 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be replaced by that of the attached Form 1 of this judgment.

The 9th to 20th of the first instance judgment shall be followed as follows.

[C. The following expenses are required for future treatment costs. Since there is no evidence to deem that Plaintiff A spent them not later than the closing date of the oral argument at the trial at the court, it is deemed that the current price at the time of the accident at the time of the accident at issue, starting on September 1, 2018 and ending on the day following the closing date of the oral argument at the court. The detailed calculation is as shown in the attached Table 2. 1. The detailed calculation is as shown in the attached Table 2. 1. 6 million won: the remaining expenses for treatment and examination (in 3 years, 2) other than the treatment and examination (in 60,000 won, pharmacologic treatment costs, various expenses for purchase of expendable goods, physical treatment costs, MRI, CT costs, the exchange of the above Minister’s tubes, the agency’s treatment costs, the form of personal public treatment costs, and the class of lecture treatment costs) shall be excluded as shown in the attached Table 2.

(d) Wheel chairs of auxiliary equipment (unit price of 2 million won, number of 5 years), shock leasing for the prevention of bathing (unit price of 200,000 won, number of 3 years), special bed (unit price of 2 million won, number of 200,000 won, and number of 5 years or more), and automatic air exhaustr inhalers (unit price of 200,000 won, number of 5 years or more), and there is no evidence to deem that Plaintiff A paid it by September 1, 2018, which is the day following the conclusion of oral proceedings at the trial. Thus, it is deemed that Plaintiff A first disbursed from September 1, 2018 to the end of life.