1. The Defendant’s KRW 11,459,686 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from May 5, 2015 to February 14, 2018.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. At around 15:30 on April 19, 2012, B, the fact of recognition that it is recognized (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”)

2) The Plaintiff, while driving his vehicle, was driving in the front of the military unit in the Geum-dong-dong, Sinnam-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, and was broomed into the central line and broomed into the E driver’s vehicle in the opposite direction. As a result, the Plaintiff, who was on board the Defendant vehicle, sustained injury, such as the boom and the brucence of the bus and the broom, etc. (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(2) The Defendant entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the Defendant’s vehicle, and the Plaintiff, a driver of the Defendant’s vehicle, was married on April 15, 2012. At the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff was under a new divorce travel without filing a report of marriage.

3) The Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 7,963,910 as medical expenses, and KRW 3,150,00 as advance payment for damages. 4) The Plaintiff’s injury and disability arising from the instant accident fall under Grade 2 of attached Table 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree”) and Grade 11 of attached Table 2 of the Enforcement Decree.

B. In recognition of liability, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff, a de facto spouse, for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the instant accident, as an insurer who entered into a comprehensive insurance contract with the Defendant vehicle B within the scope of the liability insurance amount stipulated under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act.

C. In light of the good faith principle or the principle of equity, it is very unreasonable to impose liability on the Defendant as a general traffic accident in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Plaintiff, who sets up a marriage ceremony between B and B, was involved in the instant accident during the new marriage travel; and (b) the Plaintiff’s personal relationship with the Plaintiff and the driver, and the Plaintiff’s movement circumstances.

Therefore, the defendant's liability is limited to 80% in light of the above various circumstances.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2 to 5 evidence.