1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. At around 12:30 on July 28, 2015, the Defendant assaulted the Plaintiff’s head, shoulder, etc. on the ground that the Plaintiff delays the Defendant’s claim for insurance proceeds on the front of the film department of the first floor of the Seoul Southern-gu University Hospital, Namnam-gu, Seoul, and caused injury to the Plaintiff, such as cerebrin, on the ground that the adjuster delays the Defendant’s claim for insurance proceeds.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). (b)

On July 28, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) at C Hospital on July 28, 2015, KRW 638,520 [the Plaintiff’s medical examination fees of KRW 16,260, 420, video examination fees of KRW 420,00, and examination fees of KRW 43,340, CT diagnosis fees of KRW 108,920]; (b) at D Hospital on August 1, 2015, KRW 658,160 (MRI diagnosis fees); (c) at D Hospital on July 31, 2015 through August 4, 2015, KRW 502,290 (the examination fees, hospitalization fees, medication and preparation fees, Jeju feed, film examination fees, video examination fees, and rehabilitation products treatment fees, etc. from KRW 108,00 to KRW 415,715).

C. Before the instant accident, the Plaintiff worked for the Korea Damage Evaluation Co., Ltd., and reported the same amount as indicated below as earned income.

Fixed-term benefits of KRW 1,905,000 from January 1, 2015 to February 3, 2015; KRW 3,150,000 on March 1, 2015; KRW 630,00 on April 1, 2015; KRW 630,00 on May 2, 2015; KRW 309,300 on June 1, 2015; KRW 1,164,200 on June 1, 2015; KRW 14,50,130 on July 1, 2015; KRW 16,50,100 on July 1, 2015; and the purport of the entire pleadings; and the purport of each of subparagraphs 1 through 5;

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. According to the above facts, since the defendant committed an illegal act of assaulting and injuring the plaintiff, the defendant is liable to compensate the damage suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident in this case.

B. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff's delay in the disposal of insurance money for the defendant's wife should be limited to the defendant's liability because it was one of the occurrence of the accident in this case. However, the evidence submitted by the defendant alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the plaintiff delayed the disposal of insurance money for the defendant's wife