1. With respect to traffic accidents listed in the annexed Form 1, it shall be based on the insurance contract listed in the annexed Form 2.

(The principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall be deemed to be combined)

1. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The Defendant’s remaining damages due to the traffic accident listed in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant accident”) are KRW 9,980,016, including (i) treatment costs of KRW 56,00 (clock cost), and KRW 9,424,016, and KRW 500,000,000, in total.

Meanwhile, since the defendant's negligence was 20% in the occurrence of the instant accident, the amount of damages by the defendant is 7,984,010 won (20 won x 7,980,016 won x 0.8 = 7,984,012 won, which is less than 10 won, which is claimed as burner), which is the amount equivalent to the percentage of the defendant's fault among the total medical expenses already paid by the plaintiff 6,430,220 won x 0.00 won (6,430,220 won x 0.20 won x 0.1,286,044 won x 0.0 won x 1,286,044 won. The remaining amount of damages by the plaintiff is 6,697,970 won (7,984,010 won - 1,286,040 won).

Therefore, with respect to the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay insurance money to the Defendant based on the insurance contract listed in the attached Table 2 does not exist in excess of KRW 6,697,970, and the Defendant’s counterclaim claim exceeding the above money is without merit.

B. The defendant was not negligent in the occurrence of the accident of this case.

The Defendant’s damage caused by the instant accident is 62,024,000 won (12,60,000 won) plus 40,000,000 won in total, including (i) medical expenses aftermath, 12,60,000 won in total, 9,424,016 won in lost earnings due to shesheetical disability, and 30,000,000 won in consolation money of the Defendant’s parents, and 5,00,000,000 won in total, respectively, and 62,024,016 won in total.

Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the Defendant a sum of KRW 62,024,016 and damages for delay.

2. There is no dispute between the parties to the liability for damages, or in full view of the purport of the entire arguments in the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 1, 2, 3, and 5, the plaintiff is obliged to pay the damages of the traffic accident caused by Oralba in accordance with the automobile insurance contract listed in the attached Table No. 2, and the plaintiff.