2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive insurance contract for automobile B (hereinafter “instant vehicle”), which is an automobile for the lending business, with the Plaintiff as the insured for the Shin Young-gu Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”). The Defendant leased the instant vehicle from the non-party company to transport students for profit-making purposes by receiving fees from the non-party company (the Defendant was arguing that there was no commercial transport with the instant vehicle. However, according to the evidence No. 3 of this case’s accident report, the Defendant is recognized to have operated the business of transporting students to the instant vehicle at the time of the instant accident).

On June 18, 2014, around 19:30 on June 18, 2014, the Defendant, while driving the instant vehicle in the vicinity of the New Forest Middle School in Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, conflict with the rear part of the D vehicle owned by the preceding C while neglecting the duty of front-down

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

The foregoing D vehicle was destroyed due to the foregoing accident, and the driver E was injured by the said vehicle, and the Plaintiff paid the owner of the said vehicle KRW 2,350,000 and KRW 1,271,050 in total to E by July 18, 2014.

On the other hand, Article 8 of the Insurance Clause of the Plaintiff’s business car insurance does not provide compensation for the "where the insured is an automobile for rental business, the loss caused by an accident that occurs when the lessee uses the insured automobile at a charge or price for profit-making purposes."

‘The Act' provides that

The term "the exemption clause of this case" is referred to as "the exemption clause of this case".

(i) [Facts without dispute over the grounds for recognition, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the instant accident was driven by the Defendant, who is the lessee of the instant vehicle that is a motor vehicle for the rental business, for profit-making purposes.