1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

B Emat vehicles occurred on July 14, 201 18:00.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the dismissal of the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance as set forth in paragraph (2). Thus, this is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. To delete from the 4th to 7th of the judgment of the first instance court, the 4th of the first instance court shall be deleted, and the following shall be followed:

In light of the above facts, the Plaintiff, the insurer of the Mati vehicle, is liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the Defendant due to the instant accident, barring any special circumstance, since the causal relationship between the instant accident and the Defendant’s injury is not recognized. However, as seen below, the Plaintiff’s assertion that proximate causal relationship between the instant accident and the Defendant’s injury and the Defendant’s injury and the subsequent disability can be acknowledged. (B) The Plaintiff’s assertion on the limitation of liability for damages (the degree of contribution to the instant accident, the degree of involvement in the instant accident, etc.) is aggravated compared to the accident, and thus, C, the driver of the Mati vehicle, has contributed to the expansion of the degree of disability after the treatment, and the degree of contribution to the determination of the degree of contribution to the entire victim’s injury, including a specific injury, is not reasonable and reasonable in light of the degree of contribution to the entire medical judgment.