1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 18, 2012, around 15:30 on December 15, 2012, the Defendant: (a) inflicted injury on the Defendant, on the ground that the Plaintiff, in the D Center D Center located in Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, 8:311, “I ambling off,” and, on the ground that the Plaintiff, she saw the Defendant as “I ambling off,” and, on the ground that I ambling the Plaintiff as “I ambling off, I ambre.” (i.e., the Plaintiff’s flabing s

B. The prosecutor requested the Seoul Central District Court to issue a summary order of KRW 700,000 to the Defendant, with the summary order of “the Defendant inflicted an injury upon the Plaintiff by the act as described in the above A. A.,” and the above court issued a summary order of KRW 700,000 to the Defendant under approximately 2013 high-level3459.

On November 20, 2014, the court of first instance acquitted the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant requested formal trial against the above summary order, and the court of first instance acquitted the Defendant.

(1) The appellate court, based on the Prosecutor’s appeal, found the Defendant guilty of the above injury on July 2, 2015 and sentenced the Defendant to a fine of KRW 700,000 (Supreme Court Decision 2014No4829). The above judgment became final and conclusive on November 26, 2015 by the Supreme Court’s dismissal of appeal.

(Supreme Court Decision 2015Do11445). [Grounds for recognition] The facts without dispute, described in Gap evidence 1, 2, 4, and 6, Eul evidence 1 and 5 (including paper numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the facts acknowledged as above and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Defendant assaulted the Plaintiff on December 18, 2012, thereby standing the Plaintiff.

The Defendant is liable for compensating the Plaintiff for damages caused by the tort as seen above, which constitutes a tort against the Plaintiff.

B. According to the evidence No. 5 of the scope of compensation for damages No. 1,479,560 won in total between December 18, 2012 and October 20, 2014, the Plaintiff bears the burden of medical expenses due to Defendant’s assault. Thus, the above fact is acknowledged.