logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.07.20 2016가단5198515
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 5,054,264 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from December 31, 2015 to July 20, 2017.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 31, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 10:00 on December 31, 2015, around the 405 Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Yongsan-gu Office for the first floor of the Korean Railroad Police station located in the 405 Seoul Military Station; (b) made the Plaintiff’s face one time by drinking a house; and (c) caused the Plaintiff to go beyond the floor on one occasion by making the hand-site a buck.

As a result, the plaintiff suffered injuries such as diversified ties.

B. On September 21, 2016, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1 million due to the facts constituting the crime under the preceding paragraph, and the said summary order became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 17 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition of liability for damages, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff suffered by the plaintiff due to the defendant's assault as a tort unless there are special circumstances.

However, the defendant's liability is limited to 80% in consideration of the circumstances and circumstances of this case, the result of criminal punishment against the plaintiff, etc.

3. Scope of liability for damages

A. According to the evidence prior to the pre-treatment of the medical expenses, the total amount of KRW 2,567,830 is recognized, and the amount of damages is KRW 2,054,264.

B. The consolation money shall be determined at three million won, taking into account the developments leading up to the occurrence of the instant case, the progress after the accident, the situation of damage, the degree of negligence, and all other circumstances revealed in the pleadings.

4. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow