1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff in the judgment is modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 244,678,498.

1. Scope of the trial of the political party after remand;

A. The Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the payment of KRW 941,49,550 (property damage of KRW 861,49,550, KRW 80,000) and damages for delay. The first instance court ordered the Defendant to pay KRW 177,508,905 (property damage of KRW 122,508,905, KRW 55,000) and damages for delay, and dismissed the remainder of the Plaintiff’s claim.

B. Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed against the Defendant to the effect that the Plaintiff additionally pays 417,269,534 won (property damage KRW 397,269,534, 200,000) and damages for delay thereof. The Defendant appealed to the effect that the Defendant seeks revocation of the part against the Defendant ordering payment exceeding KRW 80,392,885 and damages for delay thereof, and the part against the Defendant ordering payment exceeding the damages for delay, and dismissal of the Plaintiff’s dismissal.

C. The appellate court prior to the remand accepted part of the Defendant’s appeal, and ordered the Plaintiff to pay 152,525,839 won (property damage KRW 97,525,839, KRW 55,000,000) and damages for delay, and dismissed the remainder of the Plaintiff’s appeal.

Accordingly, only the plaintiff appealed. D.

The judgment of remand has reversed the part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the party prior to remand and dismissed this part of the case and the remaining appeal. Ultimately, the part against the plaintiff in the judgment prior to remand (29,743,695 won) and the part against the plaintiff in the judgment prior to remand (29,743,695 won = 397,269,534 won - 97,525,839 won) concerning the property damage in the judgment of the party prior to remand were finalized by the judgment of remand, and the part against the plaintiff in the judgment prior to remand (299,743,695 won) against the plaintiff as to the property damage in the judgment of the party prior to remand were remaining subject to the judgment after remand.

The defendant asserted that the scope of the trial after remand is limited to the excessive deduction of health insurance benefits that the plaintiff saw as the ground of appeal among the property damage portion, but the part of the property damage in the judgment of the party prior to remand was entirely reversed.