beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the money ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, and this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where part of the judgment of the court of first instance is used as follows. Thus, this is accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420
2.A statement of calculation of damages in the annexed Form 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be replaced by the following table:
The third to the last 18th of the judgment of the first instance shall be followed as follows.
According to the video of Eul evidence 1, the plaintiff's duty of care to confirm the safety of the plaintiff's access to the intersection where the traffic is not controlled, and to prevent the accident from spreading, and the plaintiff's failure to do so is negligent in doing so, and the defendant's automobile that entered the intersection without complying with the above negligence of the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant's liability is limited to 40% in consideration of the plaintiff's negligence in relation to the accident of this case. The defendant's liability is limited to the 5th to 6th to 3th to the decision of the first instance court.
“The future treatment costs: 9,861,741 won was used by the Plaintiff for anti-salvable treatment and metal-resistant anti-salvable treatment not later than the date of the closing of argument in the current trial, and there is no evidence that the Plaintiff spent the expenses. As such, the cost of anti-salvable treatment and rehabilitation treatment and cost of KRW 5,579,000, which is the day following the date of the closing of argument in the current trial, shall be calculated as of October 5, 2016, and the present price at the time of the accident shall be calculated as of October 6, 2016.” From 6th to 12th of the final judgment in the first trial.
E. Assistants: 181,800 won for the Plaintiff’s purchase of assistive devices by the date of the closing of argument in the trial of the relevant party. Therefore, 200,000 won for auxiliary devices for the purpose of calculation shall be deemed to have been disbursed on October 5, 2016, which is the day following the date of closing of argument in the trial of the relevant party, for the convenience of calculation.
(f).