beta
Text
1. On December 23, 2016, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff), and on December 23, 2016, the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government New-dong.
Reasons
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
The following facts may be acknowledged by taking into account the absence of dispute between the parties, the entry of the evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the statement No. 1, and the overall purport of the arguments as a result of the examination by the plaintiff and the defendant
The defendant was living in the Eastern with the plaintiff, and was living in the Easternern.
At around 21:00 on December 23, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant got to the Defendant that had been in front of receiving it difficult for the Plaintiff, who got to go to the left left side of the Coke to make it difficult for the Plaintiff to walk out, while playing the same team at the outside of the Sadton in the New-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Sadern, New-dong, Madton Park, and Madern-gu, Seoul. The Plaintiff and the Defendant got to go to the left side of the Defendant, and got to go to the left side of the Defendant who checked back to the left side.
As a result, the defendant was under medical treatment, such as surgery, after suffering from an injury to the Yellow Sponsor, but eventually, there was a residual disability that makes the left 0.1 to 0.15 with excessive visual proof.
The plaintiff asserts that there is no negligence of the plaintiff on the part of the defendant's injury, and thus, the defendant sought confirmation of the existence of the obligation against the defendant.
In this regard, the defendant is liable to pay attention to safety by conducting the game in a way that the match becomes a team of two people and conducts the match within a narrow cream, and the match was conducted in a way that does not inflict any harm on him. Since the plaintiff neglected to do so and suffered from the defendant's injury, the plaintiff was liable to compensate the defendant for damages caused by the tort, the plaintiff was served on the defendant with a duty of care to pay attention to safety. Accordingly, the plaintiff was liable to compensate for damages of the total sum of KRW 196,676,870, the total sum of KRW 6,570,420, the total sum of KRW 6,570,420, KRW 10,000, KRW 213,247,299, and KRW 113,247,299, and KRW 299, which was claimed by the defendant as part of the claim.