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. 제1심판결의 인용 이 법원의 판결이유는 제1심판결문 제3면 제16행의 “143,060,000원(= 위 3,500만 원 6,500만 원 지연손해금 43,060,274원)”을 “143,060,000원(≒ 위 3,500만 원 6,500만 원 지연손해금 43,060,274원)”으로 고치고, 피고가 당심에서 추가하는 주장에 관한 판단을 아래 제2항과 같이 추가하는 외에는 제1심판결 이유와 같으므로, 민사소송법 제420조 본문에 따라 이를 그대로 인용한다.

2. Additional determination

A. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion that the exemption clause shall apply to the Defendant’s assertion 1) was driving the instant vehicle without a driver’s license at the time of the instant accident. In light of the circumstances where the key of the instant vehicle was set up mainly at the instant vehicle during daily hours or where the Defendant drives the instant vehicle for the convenience of work at the construction site, it is reasonable to deem that the Nonparty Company impliedly approved C’s licenseless driving. Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay insurance proceeds only within the scope of the insurance proceeds under Article 8(1)8 of the Defendant’s ordinary contract terms and conditions. The Defendant is obliged to pay insurance proceeds only within the scope of the liability insurance proceeds pursuant to Article 8(1)8 of the Defendant’s general contract terms and conditions. The Defendant’s limitation on D’s liability for damages is KRW 35 million (i.e., the amount of injury KRW 20 million and KRW 11,500,000,000 per annum, and the Defendant had already paid KRW 32,153,4500 won per annum.