1. The judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid.

1. The grounds for this part of the claim for damages are as stated in this part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Scope of liability for damages

A. As to the scope of each damage caused by the Plaintiff A’s property damage, the first instance court’s decision 4, 13, and 18, regarding the scope of each damage caused by the Plaintiff’s property damage, the first instance court’s decision 1, 1, and 18.

2.(a)

2) Except for adding the following judgments to the back part of paragraphs (b) and (ii), the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance [2.A].

As stated in Paragraph 1-3) of the same Article, the Defendant cited it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act (the Defendant recognized the amount of king medical expenses, future medical expenses, and auxiliary equipment of the first instance judgment at the second date for pleading of the first instance trial).

2) The Defendant’s assertion that the degree of contribution to the documentary gift should be reflected is reasonable in light of the fair burden of damages, and it is reasonable to have the victim bear the amount of compensation equivalent to the degree that the occurrence of the accident and the victim’s symptoms is recognized as having contributed to the occurrence of the after documentary gift, and the court should have determined reasonably in consideration of all the circumstances, such as the reason and degree of contribution to the after documentary gift, the correlation between the king and the after documentary gift, the victim’s age and occupation, health conditions, etc.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da100920, May 13, 201). (c) Evidence Nos. 1-5, 5, 6-1, 6-2, and 1-1, 6-2, respectively.