1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 9,421,240 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Plaintiff’s objection thereto from December 22, 2015 to March 31, 2017.

1. The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall be deemed to be filed together with the facts of recognition;

A. From April 22, 2014, the Plaintiff, along with his/her family, resides in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C apartment 412 Dong 501, and the Defendant, around June 2015, together with his/her family members, who are directly upper floor of the Plaintiff’s apartment at his/her residence.

B. Around 22:50 on December 22, 2015, the Plaintiff sought a noise problem between floors and 601, which led to the Defendant’s residence, and the Defendant suffered bodily injury, such as an unknown brain, etc., that requires treatment for about 21 days, considering the Plaintiff’s head’s face once and six times at his/her face. On the contrary, the Plaintiff used the mobile phone used in his/her hand to display his/her cell phone to the victim, and was able to saw the Defendant to saw him/her to saw him/her, and suffered bodily injury, etc., such as the Defendant’s open body of the skin, open body of the eye requiring treatment for about two weeks, and open body of the eye.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entire pleadings and photographs without a partial dispute, Gap 1 through 2, Eul 1 to 4, and the purport of the whole pleading

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion and determination as to the claim of the principal lawsuit sought payment of KRW 20,421,240,000, including medical expenses, KRW 421,240, and KRW 20,000,00,00 for mental damage, due to the Defendant’s noise and vibration generation, abusive language, and damages caused by injury on December 22, 2015.

On December 22, 2015, the fact that the Defendant inflicted bodily injury on the part of the Plaintiff on the part of the Defendant on the part of December 22, 2015, such as an unknown brain for about 21 days in need of medical treatment is as seen earlier, and thus, the Plaintiff is liable to compensate the Defendant for damages arising from the tort.

On the other hand, there was no dispute between the parties that the plaintiff and the defendant had the trial cost due to the noise problem between the plaintiff and the defendant, but the defendant caused noise and vibration to the extent that the defendant could not participate in social life.

In December 22, 2015, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff had expressed a abusive or abusive language to the Plaintiff.

In addition, each entry of the health department, Gap evidence 3-1 and two about the amount of the defendant's compensation.