(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.05.13 2019나318322

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.05.13 2019나318322

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 24, 2018, around 04:00, the Defendant paid KRW 200,000 to the Plaintiff and to engage in commercial sex acts with the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff had to take out the money without having complied with the Plaintiff’s demand for sexual intercourse. In response to the Plaintiff’s failure to return the money and the Plaintiff’s head and her hand on several occasions, the Defendant sustained an injury to the non-alley-fforcing, which requires approximately six weeks of medical treatment.

(hereinafter “instant tort”). (b)

On April 26, 2018, the Plaintiff was hospitalized in E Hospital on April 26, 2018, and was diagnosed as a non-alley, and was discharged on April 27, 2018, and was discharged on May 4, 2018, but was discharged on May 4, 2018, and was discharged on May 16, 2018, and was discharged on May 19, 2018.

C. On February 19, 2019, the Defendant was indicted for an injury to the Daegu District Court Kimcheon Branch (No. 2019No. 108) on the instant tort, and was convicted by the said court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1, Gap 3-1, Gap 2, Gap 4-2, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. According to the above facts of recognition of damages liability, the defendant is liable for damages sustained by the plaintiff due to the tort of this case.

In regard to this, the defendant alleged that the defendant did not engage in sexual traffic on the ground that the plaintiff had time and did not return 200,000 won, and that the defendant did not dispute with the plaintiff, and that this should be taken into account in calculating the amount of damages. However, in light of the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff cannot be deemed to have provided a cause for the occurrence of the tort in this case, and the plaintiff was unilaterally assaulted by the defendant, and the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

3. The scope of damage liability is at the time of the accident.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 김천지원 2019.05.15 2019고단108

-청주지방법원 2019.11.15 2016가단105671

-인천지방법원 2020.04.28 2019나3257

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2019.09.24 2018나1046

-대구지방법원포항지원 2020.10.14 2020고단931