1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was around 23:40 on December 2, 2015, the Defendant: (a) destroyed the opening on the left side of the driver’s seat and the part of the driver’s seat and interfered with the Plaintiff’s business by using violence, such as the two-time taxi cars operated by the Plaintiff; and (b) the Plaintiff sought compensation for mental damage caused by the Defendant’s tort.

2. The judgment of the defendant is the person who has given the wheels of the taxi operated by the plaintiff one to two times at the above date and place.

However, the above cab was damaged by the defendant's above act only with the evidence No. 1 (Case No. 1 Confirmation Board).

It is not enough to recognize that the business of the defendant was obstructed or that there was damage to the taxi or interference with the business of the defendant.

Even if so, mental suffering is also recovered by compensating for property damage. Therefore, it is not reasonable for the plaintiff to independently seek consolation money for mental suffering caused by the infringement of property right, not by infringement of life and body.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.