A. 272,305,000 won for Plaintiff A;

B. Plaintiff B’s KRW 269,305,00 and each of them on June 17, 2015.

A. Facts of recognition 1) The victim C is a white car owned by Nonparty D (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) around June 17, 2015, around 01:15, around June 17, 2015.

(2) Around 31.8 km in the direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 31.8 km point in the boundary line of the Daejeon U.S. N.S., the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction. At this time, the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 3nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 3nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 2nd direction of the 3nd vehicle. The 2nd direction of the 3nd direction of the 3rd vehicle, the 2nd direction of the 3rd direction of the 3rd side of the 2nd vehicle, conflict with the 3rd direction of the 2nd.

3) The foregoing accident C (hereinafter “the deceased”).

(4) The Plaintiff was the father of the Deceased on June 22, 2015 due to cerebral blood and dives damage, etc.) and died on June 22, 2015. The Plaintiff is the mother of the Deceased, the deceased’s heir, and the Defendant was the insurer who entered into an automobile mutual aid agreement with respect to the Affected Vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. In light of the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the purport of the statement and the entire argument by Gap evidence No. 9 and the following circumstances, namely, ① in light of the fact that in the right side line of the two-lane, shakening marks of strings are identified, a sea-going vehicle is deemed to drive a two-lane straight line with water or to drive a side by getting off the side, and ② even if the side side was not affected.

Even if the result of the analysis of the screen image of the Gabbox, the plaintiff vehicle is limited to one side line.