1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

가. 책임의 인정 다툼 없는 사실, 갑 제9호증(각 가지번호 포함)의 각 기재, 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, 피고는 2016. 6. 14.경 오스트레일리아 퀸즐랜드 주 번다버그 지역에 있는 백패커하우스 ‘C’에서 원고가 타고 서 있던 스케이트보드를 발로 밀어 원고를 넘어지게 한 사실(이하 ‘이 사건 가해행위’라고 한다), 원고는 땅으로 넘어지며 오른쪽 팔로 몸을 지탱하다가 오른쪽 팔꿈치관절 후방 충돌 증후군, 오른쪽 견관절 상부 관절와순 부분 파열의 상해를 입게 된 사실을 각 인정할 수 있다.

According to the above facts, since the harmful act of this case constitutes a tort against the plaintiff, the defendant is responsible for compensating the plaintiff for damages caused by the harmful act of this case.

B. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the Plaintiff exempted the Defendant from the Defendant’s liability for damages by taking medical treatment at the hospital on the day of the instant harmful act, which the Plaintiff would no longer hold the Defendant liable for damages.

However, in light of the circumstances in which the Plaintiff continued to provide medical treatment even after returning to Korea, as a whole, as stated in the evidence No. 11 and the purport of the entire pleadings, and the Defendant also recommended the Plaintiff to provide medical treatment, and continuous discussions on the payment of medical expenses, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff exempted the Defendant from the liability for damages, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

C. The Defendant, as an adult, has a duty of care to prevent safety accidents on his own body, and could sufficiently anticipate or avoid the harmful act of this case. Thus, the Plaintiff was able to have been aware of the harmful act of this case.