1. With respect to the accidents listed in the attached Form 1, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) based on the mutual aid contract listed in the attached Form 2.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. At around 19:00 on July 3, 2013, Nonparty B driven C urban buses owned by Samsung Passenger Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and operated a 1-lane road in front of 4,000,000,000 U.S., in the direction of the Plaintiff’s proceeding, Nonparty B took the Defendant’s right hand over the Defendant’s right hand unclaimed from the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to the left side in the direction of the Plaintiff’s proceeding while driving the cBS broadcasting station on the back side of the 19,000 U.S.-dong, Busan, and caused the Defendant to suffer a confratating fluence on the right side, the right side part of which requires approximately eight weeks of treatment

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). B.

The Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a motor vehicle mutual aid agreement (hereinafter referred to as “instant mutual aid agreement”) with Samsung Passenger Co., Ltd. as shown in attached Form 2 with respect to the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, evidence 2, and 3-1, 2, and 3-2, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 3-1 through 3-3, and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Judgment on the counterclaim

A. The summary of the Defendant’s counterclaim claim was caused by the instant accident, and thus, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay mutual-aid money under the instant mutual-aid contract to the Defendant for damages incurred by the Defendant due to the instant accident. The amount is KRW 375,00,000,000,000 for lost income, KRW 1547,430,000,000 for treatment expenses, KRW 3 million for future treatment expenses, and KRW 9,279,430 for consolation money.

B. In full view of the overall purport of the statements and arguments stated in the evidence No. 4-1 to No. 6, the following facts are as follows: ① the Plaintiff’s vehicle was in a relatively short speed of about 22 km in time; ② the Defendant was driving on the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle in the direction of the passage of the vehicle; ② the Defendant was driving on the Plaintiff’s vehicle in a narrow distance from the road on the right side of the Plaintiff’s direction; but ② the Defendant was walking on the Plaintiff’s vehicle, but the Defendant was driving on the Plaintiff’s vehicle, but it was thought that the Defendant was not able to return back the path again.