1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the costs of KRW 4,875,055 against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the said costs are assessed against the Plaintiff-Counterclaim Plaintiff A.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. F, around 16:10 on March 17, 2013, around 16:10, 2013, the national highways No. 7 around the Southern-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, was driving G-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-

Plaintiff

A operated H Oba, and entered the right farm road from the right farm road to the national highway No. 7 to the two-lanes, and changed to one-lanes, while Mba F was in progress as above, Plaintiff A’s Obaba while Mba F was in progress.

(hereinafter “instant accident”).

B. The Plaintiff A suffered injuries, such as cage cage cage cages, right frys, etc., due to the instant accident.

C. Plaintiff B is the wife of Plaintiff A, and Plaintiff C, D, and E are the children of Plaintiff A.

The defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with F in relation to passenger vehicles.

[Ground of Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap 1 and 8 evidence, Eul 1 and Eul 1 evidence (including each number), the result of the commission of each physical examination to the director of the Gyeongbuk University Hospital in the first instance court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of and limitation on liability for damages;

A. According to the fact of recognition as above, the accident of this case occurred due to the operation of the franchiseer vehicle operated by F, and the defendant, who is the insurer of the franchiseer vehicle, is liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the accident of this case, unless there are special circumstances.

B. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of exemption 1) The Defendant’s assertion No. 1 and No. 1 (including a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) are written and arguments in the following: (a) while the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant’s assertion was exempted from liability is driving normally, the Plaintiff’s Oba in the agricultural road taken the two-lanes from the farming road to the two-lanes, and the instant accident occurred in conflict with F’s vehicle; (b) it cannot be deemed that the Defendant had a duty of care to anticipate and drive the accident; and (c) the instant accident was entirely caused by the Plaintiff’s negligence.