1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

2...

1. The reasons for this part of the facts of recognition are as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except that the court’s second 15th 15th son of the judgment of the court of first instance deemed “sporadic sporadic sporadic sporadic sporadic spodic s

2. The reasoning for this part of the judgment of the court concerning the cause of the claim is as follows: (a) the sum of KRW 42,712,460 in the second 19,20 in the judgment of the court of first instance (i.e., KRW 3,06,480 in the amount of KRW 19,645,980 in the amount of KRW 19,680 in the amount of KRW 11,06,480 in the aggregate (i.e., KRW 3,066,480 in the amount of KRW 3,06,480 in the amount of KRW 5,00 in the amount of KRW 5,00 in the amount of KRW 5,00 in the amount of KRW 5,00 in the amount of KRW 5,330 in the judgment of first 1 as follows).

B. Since it is the same as the statement in a claim, it shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

【The portion of consolation money] The Plaintiff sought KRW 3 million in total of the daily income and the future medical expenses, including the parts and degree of the Plaintiff’s injury, the amount of medical expenses, and the fact that the Defendant also suffered minor injury in the course of setting up against the Plaintiff. E) while the Plaintiff sought KRW 3 million in total of the daily income and the future medical expenses, there was a lost income exceeding KRW 427,384 as recognized in the above paragraph (a) solely on the basis of each of the evidence Nos. 3 and evidence Nos. 4-1 and 4-2.

this part of the claim is not accepted because it is difficult to recognize the occurrence of future treatment costs.

3. Conclusion

A. As to the Plaintiff’s compensation for damages caused by a tort (property damages of KRW 290,307, KRW 307,000, KRW 4,290,307) and the portion cited by the first instance judgment among them, the Defendant, after the date of tort, dispute over the existence or scope of the Defendant’s performance obligation from July 3, 2018, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the Plaintiff, until August 16, 2019, and from the following day to the day of full payment.