1. With respect to the accident described in the separate sheet, the damages liability of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall be on the day of 909.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. (1) The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract for C vehicles owned by B (hereinafter “ASS”), and the Defendant is the owner of D 998 Orala (hereinafter “Defendant Orala”)

(2) On August 29, 2014, B entered the date and time of the accident as August 26, 2014 in B’s No. 1 (A) but in light of the fact that the Defendant’s memory on the date and time of the accident as August 27, 2014 (Written Answer) appears to be incorrect, and that the date and time of the accident appears to be August 29, 2014 in light of the written evidence No. 1 and the entire purport of the pleading, the date and time of the accident in this case appears to be August 29, 2014.

19:00 Driving a sea-going vehicle.

The back part of the defendant Otoba, which was set up in the apartment parking lot in Daejeon Jung-gu, was shocked by the driver of the sea vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff, the insurer of the Maritime Vehicle, is liable to compensate the Defendant for the damages caused by the instant accident caused by the negligence of the driver of the Maritime Vehicle.

2. Scope of liability for damages

A. The plaintiff's assertion that this case is a minor contact accident and there is no damage exceeding 559,800 won for repair expenses, and the defendant asserts that the defendant suffered damage equivalent to 11,125,300 won for repair expenses and 10,500 won for the period of four weeks repair due to the accident in this case.

B. It is not sufficient to acknowledge the defendant's assertion only by the descriptions of the judgment fee, Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 9 (including the number of branch numbers), and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, in light of the developments leading up to the instant accident, the type of Defendant Oral Ba, the damaged parts, and the degree of damage, which can be recognized by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement No. 6.