1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a juristic person established pursuant to the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act (hereinafter “Industrial Accident Insurance Act”), which carries out industrial accident compensation projects by the Minister of Labor, and the Defendant is an insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile mutual aid agreement with respect to active sub-tourism (hereinafter “non-party company”) and a bus A (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

B. The Plaintiff Co., Ltd. of the instant accident (hereinafter “AV”) leased the Defendant’s vehicle from the Nonparty Company to and from work of its employees with a driver B belonging to the Plaintiff. On January 24, 2011, B, while driving the Defendant vehicle at around 09:40 on Jan. 24, 201, stopping the Defendant vehicle at the bus stop at the Suwon-si Market, Suwon apartment apartment bus stoping the front vehicle, resulting in the Defendant’s injury, such as the fluor C and D, an employee of the Plaintiff, who was on board the Defendant vehicle, who was on board the front vehicle, by drilling the front vehicle, due to the sudden decline of the front vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

Until May 11, 2011, the Plaintiff paid 18,817,840 won in total, including medical care benefits 1,291,680 won, temporary layoff benefits 4,809,830 won, and 6,101,510 won in total, including D medical care benefits 2,201,80 won, temporary layoff benefits 10,514,530 won, respectively, to the victims.

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute; entries in Gap evidence 1 through 3 (including each number in the case of additional number); the inquiry results of E-mail in the trial of the party; the purport of the whole pleadings)

2. The occurrence of the Defendant’s liability for damages (the Supreme Court Decision 2015Na50946 Decided the same case, which became final and conclusive by the Supreme Court on September 7, 2015)

A. The non-party company had the Defendant Company B, one of its employees, drive the Defendant vehicle while providing the Defendant vehicle as a vehicle for commuting to and from work. The Defendant vehicle is designated by the Plaintiff.