A. The facts of recognition are as follows: (a) Nonparty C driving a Fcar (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) on June 16, 2009 at the section prior to the Non-Protection Zone for the E-Bed Station located in the E-Bed Station located in Seongbuk-si, Sungnam-si, Manam-si, and shocked the left-hand side of the Plaintiff’s G Obabba in the front part of the instant vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”); and (b) due to the instant accident, the Plaintiff suffered from the upper left-hand border and non-fabratization and subdivision of the instant vehicle; (c) the fact that the Defendant is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the instant vehicle does not conflict between the parties, or that the Defendant is recognized by taking into account the overall purport of arguments as stated in Gap’s evidence No. 2 and 3, and evidence No. 20-1 through 3.

B. According to the facts of recognition of the above liability, the plaintiff was injured due to the operation of the automobile of this case, and the defendant, who is the insurer, is liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case, barring special circumstances.

C. The limitation of liability, however, is reasonable to limit the defendant's liability to 90% in consideration of the circumstances surrounding the accident of this case and the various circumstances shown in the argument of this case, such as the fact that the plaintiff, as the plaintiff, has an obligation to refrain from the accident by well showing the pre-protection coordinate in the non-protection coordination zone.

2. The Plaintiff’s damages within the scope of liability for damages are as follows:

In principle, the period for the convenience of calculation shall be calculated on a monthly basis, but the period of less than the last month and less than KRW 1 shall be discarded.

The calculation of the current value at the time of the accident shall be based on the reduction rate of 5/12 percent per month to deduct the interim interest.

In addition, it is rejected that the parties' arguments are not stated separately.

The loss of lost income equivalent to the monetary total appraised of the capacity of the Plaintiff lost due to the instant accident shall be based on the following facts and assessment.