1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 2,800,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from June 21, 2014 to February 16, 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. B On June 22, 2013, the Defendant entered into a comprehensive business automobile insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with the Defendant, which includes the content that guarantees self-physical harm with respect to a car car within the limit of 100 million won. The Plaintiff is the insured of the instant insurance contract that drives the said car.

B. The type and limit of insurance money for insurance money for personal physical accidents secured by the insurance contract of this case is the amount of insurance money for each grade of disability as stated in the insurance policy in accordance with the classification of subsequent disabilities in the standards for payment of self-physical accidents and the table of the amount of insurance coverage for each grade when the physical disability remains after being treated as a direct result of the injury suffered by the insured.

The amount of insurance coverage for the disability grade 15 million won, 30 million won, 5 million won, 5 million won, 10 million won, 10 million won, 2.1 million won, 4.2 million won, 1.2 million won, 14 million won, 1.5 million won, 1.5 million won, 1.5 million won, 1.5 million won, 1.5 million won, 1.6 million won, 6 million won, 1.6 million won, 6 million won, 1.6 million won, 1.2 million won, 4 million won, for the classification of after-age disabilities and the list of purchase amount of insurance for each grade.

C. On June 21, 2014, the Plaintiff, while driving the said car and driving it in the vicinity of the Dogdogdog-gun, Ulsan Metropolitan City, the Plaintiff shocked the Doggdo-ro.

The plaintiff suffered from the injury of the pressure frame 2 times in this accident. D.

The Plaintiff’s injury constitutes “a person who is remaining after malvout 11-6” in attached Table 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, and constitutes 19% of general employees with labor force and 3 years of temporary disability, based on spin damage IA1d of Mabrod Labor Capacity Loss Table.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, 3-2, and the result of the physical examination of Busan University Hospital, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff's disability remains remaining in spine in attached Table 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act 11-6.