beta
Text
1. The Defendant: KRW 67,443,359 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from August 23, 2014 to October 18, 2016; and
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On August 23, 2014, at around 09:00, the Defendant cut around trees in order to prevent the falling of fallen leaves from falling off to the mountain, after overtakinging tin from the Defendant’s mountain located in Hong-gun, Hongsung-gun, and completing the cryp work.
B. Accordingly, the Defendant used the electric saw (40 cm in length) to cut the surrounding trees and started work. During that period, the Plaintiff, who is the dynamics of the Defendant, and the private village, was approaching the Plaintiff, who is the births of the Defendant, was using the electric saw (40 cm in length) to cut down the trees well.
C. The Defendant did not let the Plaintiff in the vicinity go out of the work counter, and cut trees using the former chain saw, and suffered injuries, such as damage to the surrounding land and power lines on the left side of the Plaintiff’s bridge.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 2 and 14, and the purport of the premise for pleading
2. Determination
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff's assertion that he was liable for damages was followed by the defendant's act of avoiding a dangerous work radius at the time of the former chain saw. The defendant's act of causing trees to be feled so that the trees can be used as counter to the plaintiff's living together with the defendant's act of living together with D, and the plaintiff was feled, but the plaintiff was feled, and the plaintiff was feld with trees without any speech. The former chain saw that the defendant's act was operated by the defendant was just cut the plaintiff's bridge and the accident of this case occurred. Thus, the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiff as a tort.
B. The defendant's assertion that he had given due care to the plaintiff and others, including the plaintiff, before he set a sprink, but the plaintiff became the plaintiff in the front chain saw of the defendant as the plaintiff was spacked due to the fact that the plaintiff in the wooden area was spacked, and the defendant is approaching the spack within the radius of the spack work.