beta
Text
1. Defendant B’s KRW 1,084,920, and KRW 5% per annum from December 11, 2015 to May 17, 2017, and the next day.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendants are married couple, and the Plaintiff is a neighbor who resides in the lower floor of the Damsung (hereinafter “instant lending”).
B. On January 13, 2016, Defendant B received a summary order (U.S. District Court Decision 2015 High Court Decision 23972) of KRW 1,000,00,000, on the ground of the crime of injury that “Around October 6, 2015, Defendant B received a summary order (U.S. District Court Decision 2015 High Court Decision 2015 High Court Decision 23972) of KRW 1,000,00,000, as it is, the above summary order was finalized.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3-3, Eul evidence 1-1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Inasmuch as the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendants inflicted bodily injury on the Plaintiff by assaulting the Plaintiff, the Defendants jointly and severally compensate the Plaintiff for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the said tort (the treatment cost of KRW 5,240,570, diagnosis cost of KRW 215,00, medicine cost of KRW 97,300, future treatment cost of KRW 2,540,000, KRW 15,960,000, KRW 15,960,000, KRW 4,500, and KRW 28,52,870).
3. Determination
A. As to Defendant B’s claim against Defendant B, Defendant B suffered an open prize for the entry that requires medical treatment for about 14 days by assaulting the Plaintiff, as recognized in the preceding 1.1. Therefore, Defendant B is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages incurred by the said tort. However, in addition to the facts acknowledged in the preceding 1.1., in addition to the respective entries in the evidence in subparagraphs B through B and 8 and the overall purport of the film and the pleading, the Plaintiff suffered an injury in the course of fighting one another in the process of raising mutual fighting with Defendant B, and in consideration of these circumstances, Defendant B’s liability is limited to 80%.
3) The scope of the amount of damages set forth in the evidence No. 1, No. 1, No. 7, and No. 4-2, No. 4, and No. 13, respectively.