1. The Plaintiff’s liability for damages against the Defendant regarding an accident listed in the separate sheet is KRW 2,820,496 and this.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is F Car Truck driver, and the Plaintiff’s assistant intervenor is an insurer who concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the said vehicle.

B. At around 09:30 on October 18, 2014, the Plaintiff was driving in the direction of sounding the Plaintiff’s vehicle from the Defendant’s G Jina vehicle, which entered the Plaintiff’s vehicle line, while driving in the direction of sounding the direction of sounding the vehicle in the underground direction of the Government-Si of the Gu-si.

Accordingly, the defendant suffered injuries, such as salt pans, tensions, clifum salt pans, etc., by the defendant.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”) C.

The Defendant was diagnosed at H Hospital on October 20, 2014, by light spatitis, spatum base, spatum base, spatum side escape card, and the escape symptoms of the conical signboards, etc., and was hospitalized at I oriental medical hospital from October 20 to October 25, 2014.

Plaintiff

The Intervenor paid KRW 5,111,290 to the Defendant’s medical expenses from October 20, 2014 to April 23, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1-1, 2-2 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding that the accident of this case occurred due to the negligence of the plaintiff, who neglected the duty of Jeonju, and thus, the plaintiff is liable to compensate for the damage suffered by the defendant due to the accident of this case as the driver of the plaintiff vehicle.

3. Scope of liability for damages

A. In light of the degree of conflict between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s vehicle at the time of the instant accident, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant suffered from the instant accident is the principal cause of the king, and the Defendant’s treatment was less than two years after the instant accident occurred, and there was no causal link with the instant accident.

In addition, in calculating the defendant's lost income due to the accident of this case, the loss rate of labor ability during the period of hospitalization immediately after the accident of this case is not more than 100%, but only 11.5%, such as the result of physical assessment.