beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 300,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from December 22, 2016 to March 27, 2019.
Reasons
1. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) the Defendant habitually and repeatedly committed assault and intimidation against the Plaintiff for two months, including the commission of an act of causing property damage, intimidation, and assault; and (b) the Plaintiff suffered mental or physical pain; and (c) the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff consolation money amounting to KRW 50,000,000 and damages for delay due to such series of tort.
On May 28, 2016, the Defendant destroyed the Plaintiff’s house entrance, etc. due to the decline while murdering the Plaintiff with the bath and threatening the Plaintiff (a booming the quid pro quo, e.g., the quid pro quo).
나. 피고는 2016. 6. 6. 23:30경 부산 해운대구 C아파트 D동 24층 복도에서 원고에게 “밤길에 머리 위를 조심해라. 어디서 머리를 쳐들고 다니느냐 확! 죽이겠다. 씨발새끼. 개새끼. 좆같은 새끼 닷새 안에 검사에게 이야기해야 한다. 연락이 올 것이다.”라고 말하며 주먹을 원고의 얼굴과 머리에 갖다 대고 주먹과 발로 차려는 시늉을 하며 협박을 하였다.
C. At around 12:55 on July 16, 2016, the Defendant: (a) placed in India, prior to the above C Apartment Ddong Guard room, the Plaintiff’s fluoral and intimidation without any reason; and (b) placed the upper part of the U.S. which the Plaintiff used and used, thereby causing injury to the Plaintiff’s head and right shoulder.
2. Determination:
A. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 4 as to the damage of property on May 28, 2016, the damages liability for damages occurred, the Defendant is recognized as having been suspended on September 26, 2016 in relation to the damage of property of the first household, but the facts constituting the crime are deemed to be “the Defendant was aware of the indecent act from a person in de facto marital relationship E, and thereby harming its utility by walking the door door on the ground that he does not open the Plaintiff’s residence while hearing the indecent act from the person in de facto marital relationship, and leaving the door on the ground that he did not open the Plaintiff’s residence.”