1. An accident that occurred on December 18, 2016, when the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff was dissatisfed from the Dactum Points C located in the Permitted-si Area C.

1. The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed to exist;

A. At around 1:30 on December 18, 2016, the Defendant, while serving meals at Drackers C located in G located in the Suwon-si Area (hereinafter “instant restaurant”), which was operated by the Plaintiff, lost a balance by brightnessing down on the floor.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.

The floor of the restaurant in this case was a different day, and the seat in the store was full seat at the time of the accident in this case.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings]

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The Plaintiff, as an operator of the instant restaurant, has a duty of care to remove foreign substances away from the floor to ensure the stability of customers using the instant restaurant, and to manage the floor so as not to slick down.

Nevertheless, the Plaintiff caused the instant accident that the Defendant was dissatisfed due to the negligence of leaving the floor away.

Therefore, the plaintiff has a duty to compensate for the damage suffered by the defendant.

B. The limitation of liability, however, seems to have not been difficult for the defendant to find it in light of the size of the strike, floor color, etc. that fell from the site of this case. In light of the fact that there is a mixed situation at the time and that there is a duty of care to look about the safety of the defendant as well as the fact that there is a duty of care to look at the safety of the defendant because there is no difference in foreign substances on the floor in the case of a pro rata restaurant, the negligence by the defendant who neglected such a duty of care is an important cause for the occurrence of the accident of this case and

Therefore, the liability of the plaintiff is limited to 70% of the total damages in consideration of the calculation of the amount of damages to be compensated by the plaintiff.

3. In addition to the matters stated below within the scope of damage, it shall be as stated in the attached Form of Compensation for Damages, and all of the arguments not stated below shall be deemed to have been rejected.

(a)be passive.