1. The plaintiff's claims that the court changed in exchange for the defendants are all dismissed.

2. Action.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 16, 2015, the Plaintiff, as a riding trainee, sustained injury in the right spawn, who was left from the horse while receiving riding education under the direction of Defendant B, an employee of the riding bridge D, at the indoor riding club operated by Defendant B (hereinafter “instant riding club”).

(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.

On December 2, 2014, Defendant Hyundai Maritime Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) concluded a liability insurance contract with Defendant B for sports facility business operators, namely, “from December 2, 2014 to December 2, 2015, the coverage period per capita’s maximum amount of compensation KRW 30,000,000, and self-payment KRW 300,000,000.”

(hereinafter “instant liability insurance”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap 1, Eul 4, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The horse is a large and sensitive animal with a large amount of horse, and it can not be controlled by showing any abnormal reaction if a small animal is earlier, and the risk of abortion is high if a riding trainee’s skill is low. As such, Defendant B, who operates the instant horse riding course, bears the duty of incidental protection to ensure the safety of riding trainees, such as checking the inside of the instant horse riding course or horse while checking the condition of the horse in question and running the horse in a case where the horse is cut, if the horse is cut, and the horse is cut off by a sudden interest.

In addition, since the obligor’s intentional act or negligence appears to have been caused by the obligor’s intentional act or negligence (see Article 391 of the Civil Act), the obligor is liable to compensate for damages caused by the obligor’s intentional act or negligence. Defendant B is liable to compensate for damages to the Plaintiff, since the instant accident occurred, the Plaintiff, who is in the position of the implementation assistant of Defendant B, did not verify the inside of the instant riding club or the state of horses without properly confirming the condition of the horse.