A. The facts of recognition 1) B around 09:05 on January 11, 2015, around 09:05, driving a C Costaex and stopping in Da, Jeonnam-gun. The Defendant went beyond the rear while on board the said knife and left bones was left (hereinafter “instant accident”).

2) The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an insurance contract as described in the attached Form 2 with respect to the foregoing passenger vehicles.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 3

B. The phrase “if the insured was injured due to an insured automobile accident which occurred during the possession, use, or management of the insured automobile” under the Automobile Insurance Contract refers to the case where the insured was injured by the insured by taking the insured automobile under his/her use, use, or management (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Da46375, 46382, Dec. 8, 200). In this case, using an automobile in accordance with its usage refers to the case where the insured was under his/her possession, use, or management (see Supreme Court Decision 200Da46375, 46382, Dec. 8, 200). It refers to the case where the insured was under his/her own use of various devices installed according to the purpose of the vehicle, such as closing the door at the front and rear stage of driving, even if the automobile is not in the state of driving, and thus, the person who was under his/her own possession and operation of the vehicle cannot be deemed to have been fully carried out by the Defendant through the entrance.

(See Supreme Court Decision 93Da595 delivered on August 23, 1994, see Supreme Court Decision 93Da595 delivered on August 23, 199). Therefore, regarding the instant accident