1. The Defendant’s KRW 3,420,590 as well as 5% per annum from January 8, 2015 to September 4, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The Plaintiff is a person of distinguished service to the State who was injured on one bridge due to an industrial accident at the time of his/her service as a railroad official in around 1991. The Plaintiff is a person of distinguished service to the State, at around 18:00, when he/she was on January 7, 2015, when he/she was employed as a railroad official. Around 18:00, the Plaintiff was driving on a one-lane road in front of a restaurant Ccafeteria located in the D Hospital in the front of the instant road at the D Hospital, while the Plaintiff was driving on the top of the e-driving car located on the opposite side of the said road at the central line (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

2) The Plaintiff suffered a scarcity of a scarcity that needs to be treated for about two weeks due to the foregoing accident.

3) The Defendant is an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the automobile on the part of E driving. The Defendant is an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract for the automobile on the part of E driving. The ground for recognition has no dispute, evidence Nos. 1 through 8, 14 through 16, and evidence No. 3 (including serial numbers), including the purport of all pleadings.

B. According to the facts of recognition of liability, the defendant is obligated to compensate for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case.

2. Scope of liability for damages

A. At the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff appears to have passed the maximum working age as a daily worker under the age of 76 years and 10 months at the time of the instant accident, and there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that the record of evidence Nos. 7 and 17 was insufficient to deem that the Plaintiff had been engaged in the on-site work and had received a regular income, and no other evidence exists to deem that there was a regular import

B. Although the Plaintiff sought reimbursement of KRW 1,976,37 for medical expenses and surgery expenses, the Plaintiff received KRW 204,590 recognized by the Defendant in consideration of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s actual amount paid is merely KRW 277,090; and (b) the Defendant’s contribution to the details of the Plaintiff’s claim for medical treatment appears to have been made.

C. The food expenses, transportation expenses, nursing expenses, expenses for future medical treatment expenses, nursing expenses, and future medical expenses are the instant case.