1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a legal entity entrusted with industrial accident compensation insurance business by the Minister of Employment and Labor pursuant to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, and the B (hereinafter “victim”) and J are employees of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”), the industrial accident compensation insurance subscribers, and the Defendant is a comprehensive insurer of E1 ton truck (hereinafter “victim”).

B. Around 08:50 on September 21, 2012, D driving a G company in front of the G company located in F in Busan-gun, Busan-gun, in violation of the signal from the tunnel room to the H company room. D caused an accident that conflicts with K-A-A-A-A-A-A-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U-U (hereinafter “instant accident”).

C. At the time of the instant accident, the victim was on board the steering force of the victimized vehicle. However, due to the instant accident, the victim suffered injury, such as damage to less than the victim’s brain, cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral le

The Plaintiff recognized the instant accident as an occupational accident, and paid, respectively, the amount of KRW 47,983,870 for medical care benefits (treatment costs), KRW 53,141,450 for temporary layoff benefits, and KRW 115,808,150 for lump-sum disability compensation benefits.

E. The J and the victim caused the instant accident to be the N head office located in Busan, using damaged vehicles for the purpose of education conducted at the N head office located in Busan, from September 17, 2012 to September 21, 2012, according to C’s instruction, as C’s agent for C’s affairs and technical position.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4 (if there are various numbers, including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Defendant’s liability for damages and Plaintiff’s right of indemnity;

A. The reasoning for this part of the defendant's liability for damages and the plaintiff's right to indemnity is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act is the same.