보험금
1. The Defendant’s KRW 40,726,131 as well as 5% per annum from January 13, 2016 to October 24, 2019 to the Plaintiff.
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit, since there is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff spent the medical expenses incurred to the Plaintiff as the principal’s share, not the Corporation’s share.
(b) Personal information and income: The plaintiff alleged that he/she worked at the Hague 2.3, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, calculated passive damages based on the income of the person engaged in daily labor. 2) 13.2% of the 13-2% of the labal damage (4-D-2-b, 24% of the Mabro 8.46% of the Mabro 2, 2016.38, 2016.36.36% of the 2, 2016.47.36% of the Mabro 2, 2016.38.4, 2016.36% of the 2016.36% of the Mabro 2, 2016.36.15% of the 2, 2016.36% of the 14.36% of the 25% of the 13.44% of the 2013rd 2016.4% of the 2013.4% of the 204.
C. Meanwhile, according to the evidence evidence No. 8, the Defendant’s reimbursement of KRW 15,770,770,770, as the Plaintiff’s medical expenses from the diagnosis and treatment expenses claimed by the Plaintiff as active damages in this case, may be acknowledged as having been paid to medical institutions, including P.P., etc., from August 14, 2019. The Defendant’s reimbursement of KRW 7,096,846 (X 15,770,770,770, X 0.45) equivalent to the Plaintiff’s contributory portion out of the above medical expenses paid by the Defendant from the sum of KRW 32,82,977 (7,638,347, 25,184,630) as the Plaintiff’s property damages. The amount of active damages that the Defendant would compensate the Plaintiff shall be deducted from the sum of the Plaintiff’s property damages.