(a) Indication of claims: Each description of the cause of the claim and the changed cause of the claim;

(b) Judgment on deemed confession: Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act;

2. The Plaintiff asserts that, in determining the claim against Defendant B, Defendant B is the owner of the instant car owned by the instant owner, who is operating the automobile for himself under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (hereinafter “the Automobile Accident Compensation Act”), the Plaintiff is responsible for compensating for the damages suffered by the victim C due to the instant accident that occurred during the operation of the said car.

Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Act provides that “The term “automobile” means one of the automobiles subject to the Automobile Management Act and the construction machinery subject to the Construction Machinery Management Act, which is prescribed by the Presidential Decree, among the construction machinery” in Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that “dump trucks, sump trucks, concrete mixed-type trucks, truck-loading-type concrete pumps, truck-type concrete pumps, truck-loading-type asphalt-type asphalt-type asphalt-type type type type type type truck, and type-type split-type type type-type type-type type-type type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type

Thus, Defendant B is the owner of the instant car, and it does not bear the liability to compensate for the instant accident under the Private Ship Act. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.

The Plaintiff, based on the insurance contract that Defendant B entered into with Defendant B with the marine insurance company of this case, is an operator under his own law.