logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.02.14 2017나79815
손해배상(자)
Text

1.The judgment of the first instance, including any claims added by this Court, shall be modified as follows:

The defendant.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. As to this part of this Court’s holding of liability, the reasoning for this Court is set forth in Section 1. A of the first instance judgment, except for the addition of the following:

paragraphs 1 and 2.

Since the reasons stated in the paragraph are the same as the reasons stated in the paragraph, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

The defendant asserts that there is no proximate causal relation between the plaintiff's disability and the accident of this case, or that the plaintiff's king has contributed to the above disability.

The burden of proving the causal relationship between the harmful act and the occurrence of damages in the damages claim case due to the murder, tort, etc. is a principle that the claimant bears the burden of proof. However, if the cause of a certain disease cannot be clearly clarified at the present scientific level, it cannot be required to prove in natural science all the causal relationship between the harmful act and the occurrence of damages.

In addition to the legal principles as seen earlier, it can be deemed that the Plaintiff suffered injury, such as injury caused by the injury of external eculation, etc. due to the accident in this case, and that the injury caused by the eculation of physical eculation (the area of mental health) and the right side physical eculation by the accident in this case, there is a proximate causal relation between the accident in this case and the accident in this case, and there is no proof of the Plaintiff’s disability.

Therefore, the first defendant's argument is rejected on a different premise.

The plaintiff did not have suffered or lost the consciousness of the head at the time of the accident of this case. However, at the time of the accident, the plaintiff seems to have suffered a considerable impact on brain as the head was shaking at the time of the accident, and the K Hospital's medical records are wirlah.

arrow