1. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant did not suffer an injury by the plaintiff's driver's vehicle, or that the defendant's damage cannot be recognized by the plaintiff's vehicle, and that the non-existence of the obligation is confirmed as the main lawsuit.

The defendant claims compensation as a counterclaim, alleging that the defendant suffered injury due to an accident against the plaintiff's vehicle, and that there exists a causal relationship between the above accident and the defendant's various details of damage.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 19, 2013, at around 12:06, the Plaintiff: (a) driven and proceeded by a motor vehicle in front of the “F” located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul on the back side road; (b) was shocked on the left-hand part of the Defendant’s right chest.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.

On October 21, 2013, the Defendant was diagnosed as a 7rd lever levers levers levers levers levers levers levers levers levers levers levers levers.

C. After the instant accident, the Defendant received medical treatment at G Ge-type departments, Gangnamnam Synas Hospital, etc., and on November 27, 2013, the Defendant received diagnosis from the Gangnam Synas Hospital as the name of the knife, chest-gu, chronic trauma, verte-gu, verte-gu, and vertebrate, which require approximately four weeks of medical treatment from the date of the accident to the right-hand syke, the right-hand syke, and on February 14, 2014, the Defendant received diagnosis from the Gangnam Synas Hospital under the name of the knife, chest-gu, chronic trauma, and spine-gu functional disorder.

The Plaintiff’s insurance company paid 2,040,420 won to the Defendant for medical expenses.

E. With respect to the instant accident, the Plaintiff was indicted as a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Doing Vehicle).

In a criminal case on February 3, 2015, the plaintiff was found to have shocked the defendant on a passenger car, but it was recognized that the defendant had no intention to commit an escape. The violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents was sentenced to dismissal of public prosecution on the ground that the defendant expressed his/her intention not to be punished.

(Seoul Central District Court 2014Gohap1173). On June 5, 2015, the above decision is made.