1. The Defendant’s KRW 53,389,530 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from August 6, 2015 to November 10, 2016, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, who is engaged in driving of large cargo vehicles in the transport business of the trade name “B”, entered into an automobile insurance contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with respect to the insurance period from February 28, 2015 to February 29, 2016, with respect to the large cargo vehicles with the “limited 7.5 tons flusium” (hereinafter “instant vehicle”). During the foregoing period, the Plaintiff entered into an automobile insurance contract with the Defendant with the effect that the insured would compensate for damage caused by the insured vehicle’s operation during the possession, use, and management of the insured vehicle (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).

B. According to the terms and conditions of the instant insurance contract, in the event of injury or disability caused by one’s own physical accident, the amount of the insurance paid by the Defendant is limited to the insurance coverage amount of KRW 100 million and the amount of the insurance coverage plus the actual amount of damage (the amount of compensation received by another insurance contract or by a third party).

(Article 5). (c) of the Special Terms and Conditions

On July 19, 2015, at around 10:30 on July 19, 2015, the Plaintiff, using a studio building construction site located in Daejeon Dong-gu, Daejeon, equipped with a stude attached to an insured vehicle, unloaded timber and steel, which was loaded on the said vehicle, and fell from the stude, to the degree that it is against the duty to impose heavy burden on the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant accident”) D.

The Plaintiff suffered from injury, such as the mouth fladon of the left-hand body due to the instant accident, and from August 27, 2015, the treatment of which was completed after surgery, hospitalization, etc. at the Gayang University Hospital and E E E E E E E-type medical clinic. However, the Plaintiff left behind the aftermath disability of the “contestine fladial part” in Article 3-A-2 of the C-A-2 of the C-B of the Mabromatic disability Evaluation Table (13% of the disability rate for five years from the upper day), and the latter disability of “verte damage” (29% of the disability rate for five years from the upper day) corresponding to the said disability Evaluation Table 1-A-1-d.

[Grounds for recognition] Unsatisfy, A No. 1.