1. The Defendant’s KRW 39,155,587 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from March 17, 2014 to August 14, 2018.

. The accident of this case is "the accident of this case"

(2) As a result, the Plaintiff received a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 on April 3, 2015, which was issued by the Jeonju District Court’s Gunsan Branch (2014 High-Class 5879) to the Plaintiff on April 3, 2015, and the said summary order became final and conclusive around that time, on the following grounds: (a) there was no dispute over the fact that there was no dispute over the instant summary order; (b) there was no evidence of evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and evidence Nos. 366 (including the number of pages; hereinafter the same shall apply).

(2) The results of the court’s request for physical examination of E University Hospital and F University Hospital (hereinafter referred to as “the results of each appraisal of this case”) are as follows: “The results of each appraisal of this case,” and “*The results of each appraisal of the F University Hospital,” respectively.

According to the facts of recognition of responsibility for the purport of the entire pleadings, as the person who gets off before the elevator and the person who gets off the elevator may face the cart, B had a duty of care to prevent the accident due to the cart, such as maintaining an appropriate interval with the person who gets off or going in order, but caused the accident in this case due to negligence. The defendant is liable as the user B for compensation for the damage suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident in this case.

The defendant asserts that the plaintiff was diagnosed as a combined Perjury since the accident in this case whether the combined Perjury was recognized or not, the defendant does not constitute the combined Perjury.

In other words, the following circumstances are acknowledged by the evidence mentioned above, Gap evidence Nos. 15 through 20, and evidence Nos. 37.