beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
3. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in evidence Nos. 2, 5-1, 2, and 1, 3-1, 3-9 of evidence Nos. 1, 5-2, and 1-1, 3-9 of evidence Nos. 5-2, the plaintiff and the defendant are the five-class high-class site. While there is no good space between the plaintiff and the defendant, such as the plaintiff's one person's demonstration before the defendant's husband's workplace C, which is the defendant's husband, and Eul filed a complaint against the plaintiff by defamation, the defendant's house located in Ulsan-gu, U.S., U.S. as of July 24, 2013, that the plaintiff's "in the early departure from Chok" was "the plaintiff's house located in his own house," and on the ground that the plaintiff had taken advantage of his house, the plaintiff can be recognized as the plaintiff's injury to the plaintiff by treating the plaintiff's hand and the injury of this case (hereinafter referred to as "the injury of this case").
B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant's act of causing the injury to the plaintiff constitutes a tort, and the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages suffered by the plaintiff.
I would like to say.
In regard to this, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant carried the plaintiff's chest 7 to 8 times in the above temporary border, and carried the plaintiff's chest her arms with his arms cut her 21-day treatment, etc., but it is not sufficient to recognize the above assertion only with the descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 to 4-3, 5-2, 2, and 3-3 of evidence Nos. 1 to 4-4, 5-3, 1-2, 1-3, and 3-3, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. Thus, this part of the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.
C. The judgment of the defendant's assertion is based on the plaintiff's negligence that the plaintiff was dismissed as legitimate self-defense, or that the plaintiff committed the above intentional act. The defendant's assertion is based on the plaintiff's negligence.