beta
Text
The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
judgment of the first instance.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the first instance, except for an additional determination as to the Plaintiff’s assertion that is emphasized by this court under paragraph (2). Therefore, this is cited pursuant to the main sentence of
2. Additional determination
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion E, etc. filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking compensation for damages arising from the instant accident and the decision of recommending settlement became final and conclusive. The damages recognized in the above decision were calculated on the premise of the total compensation for damages, there was no significant error in calculating the amount, and the damages claim against other joint tortfeasors, such as E, etc., has expired, the damages claim recognized in the above decision of recommending settlement should be recognized as final damages, such as E,
B. In light of the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the statements in the evidence Nos. 2-3 and 4, E and his family members filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking compensation for damages arising from the instant accident (Ulsan District Court 2016Da50831), and on May 22, 2017, “the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 100,000,000 to E by June 30, 2017. If the Plaintiff fails to pay the above amount by the due date, there was a settlement recommendation decision with the purport that the Plaintiff shall pay the unpaid amount by adding the damages for delay calculated at 15% per annum from the date following the due date to the date of the full payment.” The settlement recommendation decision became final and conclusive after the date of the above settlement recommendation, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 100,000,000 according to the said settlement recommendation order to E on June 12, 2017.
However, in light of the fact that the above decision of recommending reconciliation takes effect only between E, etc. who filed the above lawsuit and the plaintiff, and that there is insufficient evidence to recognize that KRW 100,000,000 recognized in the above decision of recommending reconciliation was calculated on the basis of the whole damages suffered by E, the remaining circumstances alleged by the plaintiff are.