1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) C is KRW 592,430 per annum for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from March 10, 2014 to February 25, 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. Plaintiff A is the U.S. head of the F commercial building located in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as “instant commercial building”), and Plaintiff B is the head of the management office of the instant commercial building, and the Defendants are the merchants of the instant commercial building.

B. On March 10, 2014, Plaintiff A and Defendants had each dispute on the first underground floor around 11:05 on July 10, 2014, and Defendant D sought a management office around 11:40 on July 10, 2014.

2. Grounds for both claims; and

A. On March 10, 2014, the Defendants, as the cause of Plaintiff A’s principal claim, suffered damages by causing injury to Plaintiff A when they were engaged in separate collection work at an underground parking lot around 12:00. The amount of damages is KRW 204,210, and KRW 275,993, and KRW 10,000,00,00 for lost income due to hospitalization for seven days.

B. Plaintiff B’s principal claim 1) Defendant C incurred a loss to Plaintiff B by causing the injury to Plaintiff B on July 10, 2014, around 11:05, in the first floor below the ground level, and the amount of such loss is KRW 335,00,000 for medical expenses, KRW 5,000 for consolation money, KRW 5,000 for consolation money, KRW 2.2) Defendant D caused a loss to Plaintiff B by failing to carry out his/her behavior at the management office around 11:40 on July 10, 2014. The amount of damage is KRW 5,00,000 for consolation money.

C. On July 10, 2014, Plaintiff B, the cause of Defendant C’s counterclaim, caused damage to Defendant C by causing injury to Defendant C from the first underground floor around July 10, 2014. The amount of said damage is KRW 316,550, consolation money, KRW 7,000,00.

3. Determination

A. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings as to Plaintiff A’s claim for main claim, Plaintiff A’s judgment on claim against Defendant C)’s occurrence of liability, as a whole, the written evidence Nos. 2-1, 2, and 17-1 of the evidence Nos. 2-1, and the overall purport of the pleadings is as follows: (a) around 12:00 on March 10, 2014, Defendant C used that the issue of separate collection by Defendant D and Plaintiff A was disputed at an underground parking lot; (b) on his hand, Plaintiff A’s dubro bloth, and 2-3 times on two breaths.