1. On May 6, 2014, in relation to the accident that occurred during the operation of C vehicle at the workplace located in Namyang-si, Namyang-si.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff (formerly: ELL insurance company) is an insurer that entered into an automobile insurance contract (from February 11, 2014 to February 11, 2015; hereinafter “instant automobile insurance contract”) with respect to D and C Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”).

B. At around 10:51 on May 6, 2014, D driving the Plaintiff’s vehicle and shocked the Defendant’s workplace located in B at the Namyang-si, Namyang-si.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

The accident of this case leads to the division of the defendant's workplace, and the equipment, household goods, etc. made by the defendant, as well as the Dogman model self-products were damaged.

The instant automobile insurance clause provides that the term “damage incurred by other person’s paintings, curios, sculptures, and other art works” shall not be compensated by the substitute.

(Article 8(3)4 of Section 2) / [Reasons for Recognition] / 8(3) 4] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of evidence A 1 through 2, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. According to the above recognition that the accident of this case occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the plaintiff vehicle D, the plaintiff is liable to compensate the damage suffered by the defendant due to the accident of this case as the insurer of the plaintiff vehicle.

3. Scope of liability for damages

A. According to the purport of 1,00,000 won for reconstruction costs of the workplace destroyed by the instant accident, and the amount of damages for household goods, etc., 21,60,000 won is recognized according to the purport of 1,00,000 won for reconstruction costs of the workplace destroyed by the instant accident.

B. The facts that the Defendant suffered damage, such as wood, spawn and spawn spawn spawn spawn and spawn spawn spawn as seen earlier.

Furthermore, since the defendant submitted a counterclaim claiming compensation for damages of the above self-product damaged on July 10, 2015, this court is the ruling against the defendant and the ruling against the defendant.