beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On March 12, 2012, around 18:30 on March 12, 2012, the Defendant is punished by the Plaintiff and the Si expenses on the following grounds: (a) the vehicle driven by the Plaintiff in a written intersection located in the Busan Jin-dong, Busan Jin-gu, Busan, for the reason that the vehicle driven by the Plaintiff was cut voluntarily on the road located in the Busan Jin-dong, Busan,
In his hand, the plaintiff's head debt was fleeped, the plaintiff's face was taken by drinking, etc., and the plaintiff was placed in a diversified account that requires approximately 14 days' treatment.
(hereinafter “instant tort”). (b)
The defendant, on September 19, 2012, in this Court No. 2012 High Court Decision 3626, the above A.
The Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 500,000 for the crime that inflicted an injury on the Plaintiff as stated in the claim. Accordingly, the Defendant appealed by this Court 2012No3038, but the judgment dismissing the appeal on January 10, 2013 was rendered, and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, and 9, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of recognition of damages liability, the defendant is liable for damages sustained by the plaintiff due to the tort of this case.
3. Scope of liability for damages
A. According to the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 2, 5, 6, and 10, the plaintiff is responsible for compensating the plaintiff for damages equivalent to the lost income (=36,55 won x 3 days x 112,185 won). Meanwhile, the plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff should compensate the plaintiff for damages equivalent to the lost income, since he/she did not compensate the plaintiff for the damages equivalent to the lost income for 336,55 won from March 12, 2012 to March 15, 2012 due to the tort in this case, and the plaintiff did not compensate for the total amount of 16 days from March 16, 2012 to March 25, 2012.
Domins, Gap 2, .