1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On March 30, 2010, D = E truck on March 13:18, 2010 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

) A driving of the Plaintiff, while proceeding with the U.S. driver’s F of the Plaintiff, who was proceeding with the U.S. driver’s vehicle in the U.S. located in the U.S. room in the U.S. room. However, since the concession sign and the red on-and-off signal are installed, D temporarily suspended before entering the intersection and was negligent in driving the vehicle in the U.S. room in the U.S. room in the U.S. room while neglecting its duty of care to safely drive the vehicle in the U.S. room in the U.S. room in the U.S. room in the U.S. room in the U.S. room, and caused the Plaintiff’s injury (hereinafter “the instant accident”).

(2) The Defendant is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the Defendant’s vehicle.

3) By September 2016, the Plaintiff received KRW 31,250,280 from the Plaintiff’s succeeding Intervenor as a disability pension, and the Plaintiff’s succeeding Intervenor recovered KRW 23,751,310 from the Defendant. [Grounds for recognition] The Plaintiff did not dispute, and the Plaintiff’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and 14 (including a serial number if there is a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) is included.

Party A, as well as Party B’s evidence Nos. 5, Party B’s evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and the purport of the whole pleading

B. According to the above facts, the defendant, the insurer of the defendant vehicle, is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by the instant accident.

C. The limitation of liability: (a) the intersection, which is the place where the instant accident occurred, has a signal, etc. of yellow flashing in the direction of the vehicle driven by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff neglected to check and operate well before passing through the intersection as to whether there was another vehicle passing through the intersection; (b) in light of the fact that the Plaintiff did not wear a safety bell at the time of the accident and the damage caused by the accident was expanded, the Defendant’s responsibility is limited to 70%.

2. The scope of the liability shall be below.