1. On August 7, 2017, around 12:05, the Plaintiff’s Defendant with respect to traffic accidents that occurred under the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Westernro 159.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. B, around 12:05 on August 7, 2017, driving a C cab (hereinafter “C cab”) and towing a back-ro 159-ro, Seocho-gu, Seoul, and driving from the west bank to the Western bank, the Defendant, who crossed the said road to the right side on the left side of the running direction of the said vehicle, was shocked by the Defendant who crossed the said road to the right side from the front side of the said vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.

On August 11, 2017, the Defendant received a diagnosis of the salt table of the sbow duct from D Council members and received a pain treatment, and on August 29, 2017, the Defendant received a diagnosis from D Council members on September 19, 2017 after receiving physical treatment after undergoing a diagnosis on the right bluter part, the right bluter part, and the water treatment.

(Medical Examination) Although the date of accident is indicated as August 10, 2017, it appears to be a medical examination of the instant accident in light of the circumstances of the accident.

The plaintiff is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into a mutual aid agreement for a vehicle in the year, and paid a total of KRW 128,470 to the defendant's hospital costs due to the accident in the

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 8-2, Evidence No. 14-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant accident had a minor contact with the Plaintiff, and the Defendant did not incur injury due to the instant accident that occurred on July 18, 2016, and the Defendant suffered injury, such as the elbow salt, salt salkite, etc., the Defendant’s above injury constitutes a lusium, and all of the Defendant’s injury constitutes a lusium, and thus, the Plaintiff’s liability for damages against the Defendant was nonexistent, and the medical expenses that the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant ought to be returned to the Defendant

As to this, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff should compensate the defendant for mental damage including mental damage caused by the accident of this case, since he suffered the same injury as above.

B. The background and degree of the instant accident indicated in the foregoing facts and evidence of the determination, as well as the degree of shock in the event of the accident.