beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
purport.
Reasons
1. The reasoning for this part of the court’s liability for damages is the same as that of the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the
2. The reasons for this part of the scope of the liability for damages are as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following parts, such as deletion, deletion, or addition, and thus, they are cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Attached Form
The damages calculation table is added to the attached table of damages calculation in this judgment.
3 The term "62 years of age" of the 8th parallel shall be changed to "65 years of age".
3. The pages shall be deleted from 19 to 4.8 pages.
After the 4th 12th 12th 'competence' in the second 12th 'Bride disability assessment table is the same, and the vocational coefficient is applied differently, and in this case the vocational coefficient applied by the court below is deemed to be justifiable).
The 5th 6th am "date of the closing of argument in this case" and the 7th am "date of the closing of argument in this case" shall be deemed "date of the closing of argument in the trial."
The marks at the bottom of five pages shall be high as follows:
6 The part of "32,431,260 won" in two parallels shall be considered as "goldwon".
The 6th 3 mutual aid portion is "....... the above amount of mutual aid shall be deducted from medical expenses under the payment guarantee, so the amount remaining after being appropriated first for active damages shall be deemed to be the intention to deduct from passive damages."
6 The 8th parallel "No. 3" shall be raised with "No. 5".
6 10-14 deleted.
3. According to the conclusion, with respect to damages, the Defendant is the date of the first instance judgment that recognized that it is reasonable for the Defendant to resist the scope and degree of its duty of performance from August 23, 2014, which is the date of the instant accident, with respect to KRW 12,738,782 as passive damages to the Plaintiff as damages, and KRW 6,000,000 as recognized by the lower court.