1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. At around 16:00 on April 25, 2009, B is the Defendant’s vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”).

(B) While driving the road in the southyang-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-

(2) The Defendant is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Defendant’s vehicle.

3) On October 12, 2007, the previous owner of G driving around 22:43 on October 12, 2007, the Plaintiff suffered bodily injury, such as the upper right gate, salt, right pelvis, pelvis, etc. (hereinafter “previous accident”).

(2) At the time, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff, the insurer of the vehicle in the previous accident, seeking compensation for damages with the Seoul Central District Court 2009Da37433. On April 12, 2011, the court of the first instance rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on the premise that “the Defendant has lost 28% labor ability for 4 years from the date of mental and emotional symptoms ( July 13, 2009) on the premise that “the Seoul Central District Court (Seoul District Court 2011Na219350, 296, and damages for delay thereof)” had lost 22% labor ability for a limited period of 4 years from the date of diagnosis (hereinafter “CRPS). The court of first instance rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on the premise that “the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the damages for the disease of 191, 890, 296 won, and the damages for delay for this,” which is the Defendant’s negligence of the first instance court (Seoul District Court 2013.