The part of the judgment of the court below against the plaintiff is reversed and this part of the case is remanded.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the fact-finding or the ratio of comparative negligence in a tort compensation case is within the discretionary authority of the fact-finding court, unless it is deemed that it is considerably unreasonable in light of the principle of equity.

(1) In light of the records, the lower court’s judgment, which limits the Defendant’s liability to 90%, cannot be deemed unreasonable in light of the principle of equity. In so doing, the lower court did not err by failing to wear safety belts to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, we cannot accept the ground of appeal that the judgment below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to comparative negligence or limitation of liability, incomplete deliberation, and violation of the rules of evidence

2. Examining the ground of appeal No. 2 in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the calculation of nursing costs, failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, or by violating the rules of evidence, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, that the Plaintiff requires the opening of six hours per day by an adult.

3. As to the ground of appeal No. 3, when the victim who received insurance benefits pursuant to the National Health Insurance Act claims for damages against a third party, if the victim's negligence competes with the third party, the amount of damages calculated first shall be offset by negligence, and the insurance benefits shall be deducted from the amount of damages calculated first, and even if the victim voluntarily deducted the insurance benefits and claimed damages, the amount of damages subject to offsetting

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da2428, 2435, Jul. 15, 2010, etc.). According to the records, the Plaintiff is seeking active damages from the amount of insurance benefits of the National Health Insurance Corporation. The Defendant, upon receiving a claim from the National Health Insurance Corporation for reimbursement of the amount of insurance benefits, paid KRW 3,952,750.