1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

Basic Facts

The defendant is the husband of the deceased D (hereinafter referred to as the "the deceased"), and the child between the defendant and the deceased has the plaintiff and the plaintiff's birth E.

On July 1, 2013, the Defendant received an anonymous postal item containing an inappropriate relationship with another male, and caused the death of the deceased on July 2, 2013, by taking the head of the deceased on a glue blue blue blue, and by taking the flue face, arms, distribution, etc. into consideration.

The Defendant was prosecuted by the Jinwon District Court’s Jinju Branch 2013 Gohap92 due to the foregoing act, and was sentenced to seven years of imprisonment for conviction on January 24, 2014.

The defendant appealed to Busan High Court (original High Court) 2014No452, and was sentenced to a conviction of five years sentenced to imprisonment on June 11, 2014.

In other words, the defendant appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2014Do8264, but the judgment of the above appellate court became final and conclusive on August 11, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] According to the above facts of determination as to the claim for damages of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5-1, 2, and 3 of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5-3, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant is liable to compensate for damages suffered by the deceased and his/her children, unless there are special circumstances, as a tortfeasor who injured the deceased and caused the death of the deceased. Thus, the defendant shall pay consolation money to the plaintiff as to the amount corresponding to the plaintiff's lost income, lost retirement allowance, and consolation money equivalent to the plaintiff's share of inheritance and the plaintiff'

As the Defendant filed the instant lawsuit on March 6, 2017, which was three years after the date on which the Plaintiff became aware of the Defendant’s tort, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s right to claim damages against the Defendant was extinguished by prescription in accordance with Article 766(1) of the Civil Act.

Article 766(1) of the Civil Act provides that "a claim for damages caused by a tort shall be made by the injured party or his/her legal representative, as damages and losses.