1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Defendant’s vehicle B and C (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”).

2) On May 12, 2012, B concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the vehicle. Around 05:00, while driving the Defendant vehicle and driving the two lanes at a speed of about 129 km in speed from the two-lanes at the speed of about a speed of about 129 km, the vehicle of the Plaintiff driving (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff’s vehicle”) was driven ahead of the Defendant’s vehicle in front of the latter part of the Defendant vehicle (hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”).

3) The Plaintiff suffered bodily injury on the Gyeong-gu, Hak-gu’s base, Hak-gu’s base, and Hak-gu’s base of the accident, and caused adaptation disorder after the accident. 4) B was issued a summary order of KRW 1,00,000 on September 20, 2012, which was a violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and the said summary order became final and conclusive on September 20, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 12 through 16, Eul evidence 1 to 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and images, the result of the commission of physical appraisal to the original hospital of the first instance court and the result of the commission of complementary appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, the accident of this case occurred due to negligence that led to the excessive speed exceeding the speed limit B and neglected the duty of Jeonju. Thus, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff as the insurer of the defendant vehicle for the damages incurred by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case.

C. We examine the limitation of liability, the above evidence and the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 45 to 48, together with the overall purport of the pleadings, are as follows. In other words, at the time of the occurrence of the instant accident, the following circumstances are fully revealed.