beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The plaintiff filed a claim against the defendant for positive damages (treatment costs) 150,280 won and consolation money 97,720 won for mental damages due to the tort of this case. The first instance court fully accepted positive damages and recognized consolation money of 300,000 won.
In this regard, since the plaintiff appealed the part against the consolation money for mental damage, the scope of the trial court's judgment is limited to the claim part of consolation money.
2. On June 17, 2017, the Plaintiff suffered injury that needs to be treated for two weeks as assaulted by the Defendant at the third floor parking lot of Busan apartment C, Nam-gu, Busan, and at around 13:10 on June 17, 2017
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 3, purport of the whole pleadings
3. The Plaintiff claiming the payment of consolation money of KRW 997,720 as consolation money. However, the Plaintiff recognized consolation money of KRW 300,000 as consolation money in full view of the degree and circumstance of the Defendant’s damage indicated in the records of this case, Plaintiff’s age and degree of damage, and other various circumstances
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated by the rate of 30,000 won and 15% per annum under the Civil Act until July 26, 2018, which is the date of the first instance judgment, the delivery of the complaint of this case from August 24, 2017 to the date of the delivery of the complaint of this case to the date of full payment, which is deemed reasonable for the defendant to dispute over the existence and scope of the obligation to pay, as claimed by the plaintiff, as a result of mental damages caused by the tort to the plaintiff.
4. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of consolation money of this case shall be accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims shall be dismissed as there is no ground. The part against the defendant who ordered payment in excess of the above recognition portion (i.e., the damages for delay as to consolation money) is unfair.
However, this shall not apply.