1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 175,079,510 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from October 19, 2013 to January 13, 2017.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

(a) Recognition 1) B: (a) around 21:55 October 19, 2013; (b) the Defendant vehicle “Defendant vehicle” (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicle”).

(C) The Plaintiff’s driver’s license is the Plaintiff’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license holder’s license

) The front part of the Defendant’s vehicle was shocked by the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle’s seat door (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(2) Due to the instant accident, the Plaintiff suffered bodily injury, such as the Plaintiff’s blood transfusion, save, save, save, and saves save, etc.

3) The Defendant is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle. (B) According to the above recognition facts, the Plaintiff was injured due to the operation of the Defendant vehicle, and thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is liable to compensate for the Plaintiff’s loss as the insurer of the Defendant vehicle.

2. Regarding this, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case is caused by the plaintiff Ortoba, who had been bound by the order from the rear side of the defendant's vehicle while the defendant's vehicle was in a normal U.S., due to the plaintiff's unilateral negligence, and caused the defendant's vehicle by shocking the defendant's vehicle. The driver of the defendant's vehicle must pay attention to the above abnormal operation situation and shall not be exempted from the obligation to drive.

Furthermore, the defendant's claim as a counterclaim on the ground that the defendant's medical expenses and damages paid to the plaintiff on the premise that the defendant is exempted from liability constitute unjust enrichment.

According to the attached Table 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Road Traffic Act, when intending to change course, it shall provide a signal at least 30 meters prior to the arrival of the point where the act is intended, with a direction indicator, etc.