1. The Defendant’s KRW 358,796,445 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from May 26, 2012 to July 1, 2016.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On May 26, 2012, B: (a) around 16:00 on May 26, 2012, 2012, B (“Defendant”) is the F Cicker in D E pension located in the instant net city operated by the Plaintiff C (hereinafter “Defendant”).

2) The Plaintiff, who had been engaged in the operation of the container stuffed on the container stuffed and the container stuffed on the wind that cream support the cream without weighting, caused the Plaintiff, who had been engaged in the operation at the bottom of the container stuffed on the container stuffed on the container stuffed on the container boomed on the container boomed on the container boomed on the container boomed on the container hereinafter “instant accident”).

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

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts, the defendant, the insurer of the defendant vehicle, is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by the accident of this case. 2) The defendant's assertion that the defendant is liable to compensate for damages caused by the accident of this case (A) according to the contract of this case (A) pursuant to the contract of this case as the personal compensation insurance of this case, "the person operating the insured vehicle with the permission of the life insurance company" is exempted from the payment of insurance money under Section II. The scope of the above person who is exempted from the liability includes "the person who uses or manages the life insurance vehicle with the consent of the life insurance company (hereinafter "the insured")" and "the person who acquires the status corresponding to the user of the life insurance company by the life insurance company or the contract of the life insurance company (hereinafter "the insured employment insurance"). However, at the time of the accident of this case, the plaintiff is running the container of this case by leasing the defendant vehicle with B, which is the article of this case, and therefore, the plaintiff constitutes the insured worker's consent or the insured (Ⅱ of this case).