beta
Text
1. As to the Plaintiff A’s KRW 4,00,000 and KRW 2,00,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay for the Plaintiff KRW 4,00,000 from January 12, 2016 to KRW 2,00,00.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The plaintiffs are residents of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E Apartment (hereinafter "the apartment of this case"), and the defendant is the person who served as the chairperson of the council of occupants' representatives of the apartment of this case.
B. On November 30, 2015, the council of occupants’ representatives of the apartment complex of this case held a meeting on November 30, 2015, and resolved to re-convenate discussions in the next representative meeting on the following methods regarding the issue of “ wild animal treatment (such as height, etc.).”
C. On January 12, 2016, Plaintiff A found the Defendant at the conference room of the council of occupants' representatives of the apartment of this case, and the Defendant unilaterally removed the house that was created by the Defendant for the future and the apartment management and operation of the apartment, without any limit, and in the process, the Defendant saw the Plaintiff that he was “A” to the Plaintiff, and carried the parts of both arms of Plaintiff A and the part of the body of Plaintiff A in both arms, sealed Plaintiff A with the wall for about 14 days, and pushed the Plaintiff into the wall for about 14 days. D.
The Defendant was indicted as a crime of injury in relation to the instant injury, and was sentenced to a fine of KRW 700,000 by Seoul Central District Court 2016Da1712 on October 18, 2016. The said judgment became final and conclusive on April 7, 2017, following the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2016No4192, and the Supreme Court Decision 2017Do1315, supra.
(hereinafter “instant injury case”). E.
On the other hand, the defendant, at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office on March 18, 2016, made Plaintiff A as the defendant's defendant, opened the meeting room of Plaintiff A and two other persons on the day of the case, and expressed that "whether the meeting is delayed or not, tobacco smell in the meeting room, or snicking," etc., and continuously sounded with a large voice, and in particular, Plaintiff A without permission into the office.