2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The owner of the Party A’s status as the owner of the Aircraft B (hereinafter “C”) is C, and the Defendant is the insurer who entered into an insurance contract for the Aircraft B with B, and the Plaintiff is a corporation that provided insurance benefits for occupational accidents to E, who is an employee of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”).

On March 21, 2012, E was engaged in the work of cutting off all institutions at the floor of the workplace in the G site of FD located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongbuk-gun on March 21, 2012.

At the same time, in addition to the duration of this case, the owner and driver non-merchants were more severe.

E ordered the driver C of the instant mid-term engine and the driver of the foregoing non-explosive engine to suspend the operation of the mid-term engine, and was in a state of suspension of each of the above mid-term engines. Of the two parts of the suspended mid-term engine, 1 of the two parts of the previous mid-term engine, and 12 meters high from the steel plate attached to the structure to the floor of the workplace. The price was determined by E’s right buckbucks.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). E suffered from the instant accident, i.e., the alley of the opening of the front frame of his retirement, and the injury to the other side of his retirement from the frontline of his retirement.

The Plaintiff paid 17,050,640 won of medical care benefits, 24,538,220 won of temporary layoff benefits, and 5,621,00 won of disability benefits.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5 through 7 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), each statement of Gap's evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiff's assertion by the parties to judgment, the plaintiff of the parties concerned asserts that the plaintiff is liable to pay compensation for damages caused by the accident of this case, since Eul operated the machine of this case, since the steel plate was separated from the floor and caused the accident of this case.

In this regard, the defendant has driven the aircraft of this case C.