beta
Text
1. All appeals by plaintiffs C and D shall be dismissed.
2. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the following additional payments are ordered.
Reasons
1. We examine the determination on the legitimacy of the appeal filed by the plaintiff C and D, and the appeal filed by the plaintiff C and D seeking a change in favor of the plaintiff himself/herself in relation to the disadvantageous judgment. As such, in principle, the appeal is not permitted for the entire winning judgment, and whether the judgment is disadvantageous to the appellant should be determined on the basis of the text of the judgment in principle (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da12276, Oct. 24, 197). Since the facts that the court of first instance accepted all the claims in accordance with the purport of the claim filed by the plaintiff C and D are apparent in the record, the claim filed by the plaintiff C and D constitutes a case where the plaintiff C and D obtained a favorable judgment in whole,
Therefore, Plaintiff C and D’s appeal is unlawful.
2. Judgment on the merits (Judgment on the appeal filed by the plaintiff A and B)
A. The court's explanation on this part of the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the statement of Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where the third to the first to the first to the first to the first to the second to the second to the second to the following. Thus, the court's explanation on this part of the grounds for the judgment of the court of first
【Restriction on Liability. However, according to the evidence above, the location of the accident in this case was set at five lanes in letter, the center was installed at the center, and the driver’s view was forced to be restricted at night. At night, the deceased was also at night, and the deceased was also at a rapid speed to cross the above place without permission. The deceased’s negligence is deemed to have caused the occurrence of the accident in this case and the expansion of damages. Thus, the Defendant’s compensation rate shall be determined at 60%, and therefore, the Defendant’s compensation amount against the Plaintiff shall be limited to the remainder of 40% except the above negligence ratio.”
B. Scope of liability for damages.