1. The Defendant: 5% per annum from February 23, 2013 to February 24, 2017 with respect to KRW 13,485,120 and the said money to the Plaintiff.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. At around 19:30 on February 23, 2013, B: (a) Category C Poter Cargo Vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”)

)를 운전하여 인천남동구D 앞 편도 2차로 중 2차로를 주원고개 방향에서간석불가마방향으로 2차로를 따라 시속 약 30~40km로 진행하다가 진행방향 우측에서 좌측으로 도로를 횡단하던 원고를 피고 차량의 우측 부분으로 들이받아 그 충격으로 원고로 하여금 절구의 골절, 좌두덩뼈의 골절 등의상해를입게 하였다(이하 ‘이 사건 사고’라 한다

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

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence, Eul 1-6, and 8 evidence and images (including each number), witness Eul's testimony, part of the results of the plaintiff's principal examination, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable to compensate the damage suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case as the insurer of the defendant vehicle.

C. However, the limitation of liability is limited to the place where the instant accident occurred, and the Plaintiff also neglected to cross the road while taking account of the fact that there was an error by which the Plaintiff neglected to cross the road while paying attention to driving the vehicle, and such negligence is deemed to have caused the occurrence of the instant accident and the expansion of damage. Therefore, the Defendant’s liability is limited to 80% in consideration of this.

As to this, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant accident occurred due to the shock of the Defendant’s vehicle, avoiding a vehicle parked on the left side of the driving direction of the Defendant’s vehicle, and that there was no negligence of the Plaintiff in the instant accident, but in light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s statement about the circumstances of the accident is insufficient consistency different from the Defendant’s statement, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is rejected.

2...