logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2020.11.26 2019나67966
손해배상(기)
Text

The judgment of the first instance, including the claims that have been reduced and added by this Court, shall be modified as follows:

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 20, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around 19:15, around 2018, while driving a car for the franchise at the access road to the Incheon Highway at around 93-3, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, the Defendant pushed the Plaintiff’s arms once by drinking, while driving a car for the franchise at the access road to the Incheon Highway at around 93-3.

B. The Defendant was indicted as a crime of assault, and was sentenced to a conviction in Seoul Southern District Court 2019 High Court Decision 201Da542, and this conviction became final and conclusive as it is.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, significant facts in this court, each entry or video of Gap evidence 1 to 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant committed an illegal act of assaulting the plaintiff against the plaintiff.

As to this, the defendant asserts that the defendant did not assault the plaintiff.

Unless there are special circumstances where it is difficult to adopt a judgment of facts in a criminal trial in light of other evidence submitted in the civil trial, it cannot be acknowledged that the facts that the criminal court already became guilty of the same facts are material evidence, even though it is not bound by the fact-finding of the criminal trial.

(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da24276 delivered on September 30, 1997, etc.). In this case, considering the circumstances and evidence submitted by the Defendant in full view of the circumstances and evidence presented by the Plaintiff, it cannot be deemed that there are special circumstances to find it difficult to employ a criminal facts guilty in the relevant criminal case judgment, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion cannot be accepted.

In addition, it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiff suffered a considerable mental suffering due to the defendant's unlawful act of assault in this case. The relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant, the course and process of the assault in this case, and the assault.

arrow