1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 4,261,652 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and against this, from May 1, 2019 to May 8, 2020.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance policy with C Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”).

Plaintiff

On August 23, 2018, the driver of the vehicle driven the Plaintiff vehicle and operated the Plaintiff vehicle from the Jin-gu, Jin-si, Jin-si, Kim Jong-si to the Changwon-si Do road protection area, and caused an accident, such as attached Form 1, in which the Plaintiff was scattered at the window of the Changwon-si, Changwon-si, the window 865-4 road, which was cut off on the street of 865-4 road, due to its shock, caused a shock of an accident, which was destroyed by the shocking of the broom of the window of Changwon-si, Changwon-si, the Defendant owned.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Gap evidence No. 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. According to the above facts, the accident of this case occurred due to the operation of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and the Plaintiff, the insurer, has the obligation to compensate for damages to the Defendant.

2. Scope of liability for damages

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant’s damage caused by the instant accident is merely KRW 545,00,00, such as the cost of cleaning and the cost of repairing the leased building owned by the Defendant. On the other hand, the Defendant asserts that there was no liability to compensate the Defendant for the damages to the extent exceeding the above amount due to the instant accident. On the other hand, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff incurred damages equivalent to KRW 41,456,00,00 in total, including the cost of repairing the wall of the Defendant’s building owned by the Defendant, KRW 30,156,049, operating losses, KRW 10,500,000, and KRW 600,000,000 for washing expenses, and KRW 20,000,000,000 for the entrance or entrance repair expenses, and that the said amount was paid as compensation for damages by counterclaim

B. On the ground of the instant accident, there is no dispute between the parties that the Plaintiff is liable to compensate the Defendant for damages equivalent to the cost of cleaning and extinguishing the building contamination, and on the statement in Gap evidence No. 2.