구상금
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the following portions ordering payment:
1. Occurrence of insurance accidents and payment of insurance proceeds;
A. On October 29, 2009, the Plaintiff, as a non-life insurance business entity, concluded liability insurance for sports facility business entities (hereinafter “instant insurance”) with the B golf range (hereinafter “instant golf range”) on October 29, 200 through October 24, 2009, the insurance period of which is from October 29, 200 to October 29, 29, and the maximum amount of KRW 300 million per person (a maximum of KRW 100 million per person).
B. At around 12:50 on July 21, 2010, the Defendant suffered injury, such as brain spawn, spawn, and spawn spawn in the instant golf driving range, due to the negligence that did not well see the movement of the next person, or that did not properly deal with golf products, and caused injury to the right-hand side of C, which tried to spawn for a public good, by shocking the right-hand side of C to spawn with golf products.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.
According to the insurance agreement of this case, the Plaintiff calculated the amount of damage C as the total of KRW 13,849,246 (2,340,000,000,000 for treatment expenses, KRW 5,165,010 for maternity, KRW 2,340,00 for future treatment expenses for maternity, KRW 4,344,236 for the 63-day period of hospitalization, and KRW 13,849,246 for the consolation money ( KRW 2,340,00,00 for KRW 5,165,010). On December 13, 2010, the Plaintiff agreed with C as the total of KRW 1,350,000 for self-paid expenses, and paid KRW 1,340,000 after deducting KRW 1,10,000 for self-paid expenses (insured) on December 15, 2010.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the existence of the obligation for indemnity
A. According to the facts of recognition as above, the defendant is liable for damages sustained by C due to the accident in this case, and the plaintiff is an insurer who has paid insurance proceeds for the above damages of C, and may exercise the right to claim damages against C to the extent that it does not infringe upon C's rights pursuant to the proviso of Article 729 of the Commercial Act and the special agreement in this case.
B. The scope of the Defendant’s liability for damages is lost income A.