1. The Defendant’s KRW 16,98,637 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from February 22, 2012 to July 22, 2016.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Fact 1) B is a vehicle C around 06:30 on February 22, 2012 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

) A E-vehicle driven by the Plaintiff’s husband D while driving a vehicle and driving on the front road of a wooden Dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “Plaintiff”)

2) The instant accident is deemed to constitute “instant accident.”

2) The Plaintiff, who was on board the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident, sustained an injury to the Plaintiff, such as climatic and climatic salt.

3) The Defendant is an insurer who entered into an insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle. According to the fact of recognition of liability, the Defendant, as an insurer of the Defendant vehicle, is responsible for compensating the Plaintiff for the damages caused by the instant accident. [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1 and 2 evidence (including the serial number, Eul 2 evidence, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Except as otherwise stated below within the scope of liability for damages, attached Form 1. Each corresponding item of the damages calculation table shall be the same as the amount of damages, and the period for the convenience of calculation shall be calculated on a monthly basis, but less than the last month and less than KRW 1 shall be discarded.

The calculation of the current value at the time of the accident shall be based on the reduction rate of 5/12 percent per month to deduct the interim interest.

In addition, it is rejected that the parties' arguments are not stated separately.

Personal information 1) Personal data: The same is as indicated in the “basic matters” list of the amount of damages calculated in attached Form 2. (2) Income and operating period is as shown in the “basic matters” list of the amount of damages calculated. The Plaintiff was paid benefits from January 2, 2012 to December 2012 as specified in attached Form 2. (1). The retirement age of the said medical personnel is 60 years of age.

The defendant asserts that non-taxation, other benefits, encouragement, and retroactive benefits cannot be viewed as income which serves as the basis for lost income.

The money under the pretext of non-taxation is regularly, continuously, and continuously, in December of each year, the money under the pretext of other benefits.