1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) KRW 15,433,092.

1. The defendant's liability for damages arises

A. Fact 1) C is a DNA vehicle around 13:50 on May 10, 2010 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

) The Plaintiff A’s E-to-land (hereinafter “Plaintiff O-to-land”) driven in the same direction without signal, etc. at the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle when driving the Plaintiff, driving on the side of the Defendant’s vehicle, driving the way at which the Plaintiff A was moving the Plaintiff B to the back seat and driving in the same direction (hereinafter “Plaintiff O-to-land”).

) Without discovering the U.S., the part of the Defendant vehicle’s front part of the back part of the Defendant vehicle was shocked by the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the back part of the back part of the Defendant vehicle, the Plaintiff incurred injury, such as the Plaintiff Company A, by causing the Plaintiff to each of the above accidents (hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). The Plaintiff suffered from each of the instant accidents, such as the Plaintiff’s left-hand flaging fladrat, the complete fladrat fladratosis, the fladrat fladrat fladrat, the upper part of the lower part of the Defendant vehicle’s back part of the lower part of the back part of the Defendant vehicle, and the fladrat fladrat flaf, the upper part of the fladrat frat frat flaf, the upper part of the upper part of the part of the Defendant vehicle, and the flaf.

(2) In the instant accident, Plaintiff A was hospitalized for 357 days from May 10, 2010 to March 31, 2012, and 498 days from May 10, 201 to December 12, 201, respectively.

3) The Defendant is an insurer which has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle (the fact that there is no dispute over grounds for recognition, the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

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

C. The circumstances acknowledged by the aforementioned evidence against the Plaintiff A, namely, the Plaintiff A, who operated the Plaintiff Otoba, seems to have been negligent in operating a narrow side without a license, and the location of the instant accident;