1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. In full view of each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the plaintiff was abused by the defendants on June 30, 2017 (hereinafter "the tort of this case") and the fact that the plaintiff suffered injury, such as light salt, for about three weeks in need of medical treatment.

Therefore, the Defendants jointly are liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages arising from the tort of this case.

2. Scope of liability for damages

A. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the records of evidence Nos. 4 and 5 for treatment expenses, the Plaintiff committed the instant tort from June 30, 2017.

7.5. Until May, Korea University Hospital and D Hospital have received treatment, and the sum of the treatment costs is recognized as the grounds for 565,690.

However, comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the statement Nos. 1 and 2, the Plaintiff also asserted against the Defendants at the time of the tort of this case, and considering the motive, cause, etc. of the Defendants committed the tort of this case, 30% as determined by the first instance court by the Plaintiff’s negligence on the tort of this case appears to be reasonable, and it does not seem to be excessive.

Therefore, the medical expenses to be paid by the Defendants to the Plaintiff are 395,983 won (=565,690 won 】 100-30%).

(b) In calculating consolation money due to a tort, circumstances on the part of the victim, such as the victim's age, occupation, degree of suffering from damage, degree of negligence of the victim, etc., as well as circumstances on the part of the perpetrator, such as the degree of the perpetrator's intentional or negligent act, motive and cause of the harmful act, and attitude of the perpetrator after the tort, may be comprehensively considered.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da219163, Mar. 12, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the instant case was caused by health class, the content and degree of the instant tort, and the Plaintiff’s tort.