1. The Defendant’s KRW 35,469,885 as well as 5% per annum from May 28, 2013 to July 21, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. 1) B is a passenger car at around 19:35 on May 28, 2013 (hereinafter “Defendant car”).

(E) while driving a G passenger vehicle and driving a three-lane in the direction of “E” in the territory of the host population D with two-lanes from the water source to the Kim Quantity-Dong, the route of which has been changed to three-lanes, the G passenger vehicle driven by F (hereinafter referred to as “E”), while driving a three-lane course from the water source to the water route.

In addition, the non-party passenger car tried to avoid the defendant car and brought about the plaintiff who was at the time of the collision (hereinafter referred to as the "accident of this case"). The plaintiff was at the time of the collision with the non-party car.

2) The Plaintiff suffered injury to the left-hand pelle officer, etc. due to the instant accident.

3) The Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract for the Defendant’s automobile. The Defendant is the insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract for the Defendant’s automobile. The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap’s 1, 4,

B. According to the facts of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the instant accident as an insurer of the defendant's automobile.

C. The Defendant asserts that there was negligence since the Plaintiff was an accident while illegally parked a vehicle in the instant report on the location of the instant accident site.

It is true that the Plaintiff parked the vehicle on the sidewalk.

However, the instant accident is not caused by the Plaintiff’s parked vehicle, and it was caused by the Defendant’s change of course to Nonparty’s car, which caused Nonparty’s car to be invaded by the news report by shocking Nonparty’s car.

Considering this point, it is difficult to view the Plaintiff’s mistake as the negligence with substantial causal relationship with the occurrence of accident.

We cannot accept the defendant's argument.

2. Except as otherwise stated below within the scope of liability, each of the attached damages calculation table shall be applicable.