beta
Text
1.Paragraph 1 of the order of the judgment of the first instance, including a claim reduced by this Court, shall be amended as follows:
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) borrowed KRW 30,00,000 from the Defendant around the end of March, 2014; (b) the Plaintiff decided to repay the said loan by July 23, 2014; (c) on July 23, 2014, the Defendant used the Plaintiff’s vehicle C (hereinafter “instant vehicle”); (d) on July 9, 2014, the Plaintiff saw and threatened the Plaintiff, while taking a bath to the Plaintiff; and (e) on July 23, 2014, the Plaintiff took a bath and threatened the Plaintiff.
① Inasmuch as the Plaintiff suffered from injury due to the above Defendant’s assault, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 701,140 for medical expenses, KRW 2,945,810 for lost earnings, and KRW 3,646,950 for damages incurred during the Defendant’s arbitrary use of the instant vehicle, and KRW 19,950,00 for usage fees, repair costs, and fines for negligence. As the Plaintiff paid the Plaintiff for damages, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 19,950 for damages (i.e., KRW 1,050,00 for 19 months x 19 months), repair costs, KRW 9,494,870 for total amount of KRW 426,70 for fines for negligence, and damages for delay.
2. Determination
A. The Defendant assaulted the Plaintiff on July 9, 2014, July 23, 2014, on the sole basis of the descriptions of evidence No. 1-5, No. 5, and No. 8, as to the claim for damages caused by assault.
In order to treat the injury caused by the Defendant’s assault, the Plaintiff received medical treatment as alleged by the Plaintiff.
It is not sufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff suffered loss due to failure to obtain income, as alleged by the Plaintiff, while receiving treatment, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
The plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.
B. The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant stolen the instant vehicle and used it without permission, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and rather, according to the purport of the entries and arguments in the evidence Nos. 3 and 8.