1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

3. The first instance.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of the instant case is as follows, except for the addition of the following judgments as to the matters alleged in the court of first instance, and thus, it refers to the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional matters to be determined

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) ought to be limited to KRW 1,300,000,000, which is recognized by the first instance court, by reflecting 30% of the credit.

② After the accident of this case, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 4,00,00 with the Defendant as the principal deposit in Busan District Court No. 1409, 2017, and reported that the Defendant would not exercise the right to recover the deposit until the non-prosecution decision on the criminal case or the judgment of innocence became final and conclusive without the consent of the principal depositee. Therefore, the above deposit should be deducted from the Defendant’s claim amount.

B. (1) According to the reasoning of the first instance court’s response to the physical examination of Busan University Hospital, the first instance court’s determination on the assertion is justifiable in that it is expected that KRW 1,300,000 will be the cost of future treatment for the Defendant’s operation, antiscopic surgery, rascopic treatment, etc.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

C. (2) If the criminal deposit in the judgment on the assertion is valid as a repayment deposit, it is required that the creditor has provided the payment for the whole amount of the obligation and deposited the entire amount of the obligation, and that the deposit for the part of the obligation is not the whole amount of the obligation, the creditor shall either express his/her intention of reservation or receive it without reserving his/her objection.

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da14616 delivered on July 26, 1996, and Supreme Court Decision 97Da37784 delivered on November 11, 1997, etc.). The Plaintiff’s criminal deposit is a criminal deposit.