A. The facts of recognition 1) B are C concrete mixtures trucks around 11:38 August 12, 2014 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).

(i) A driver's license and driving the E Company's two-lanes 722 lanes in front of the E Company, located in D at the Hasan City, to the gold-line from the East-U.S. Confection, the two-lane course was changed from the first to the second two-lane, and the F Driving G K7 (hereinafter referred to as "victim's vehicle") operated along the two-lanes in front of the horse at the same end.

(ii) The Plaintiff, who was on the top of the damaged vehicle due to the instant accident, sustained injuries, such as the right bridges and the exit of the signal apparatus installed in front of the E company by leaving the road to the right part while avoiding the Defendant vehicle and leaving the road to the right part. (ii) The Plaintiff, who was on the top of the damaged vehicle, suffered injuries, such as the bridges and the exit of the upper right part.

3 The defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the defendant vehicle.

B. According to the above facts, the defendant is liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident of this case as the insurer of the defendant vehicle.

C. The Defendant asserts that the instant accident was caused by the joint tort committed by the Defendant’s driver B and the driver F of the damaged vehicle, and that the damaged vehicle was operated for the joint use of the Plaintiff and F, and the Plaintiff was transferred to the said vehicle without compensation, and thus, the limitation of liability due to the accompanying passengers should be imposed.

While F was entrusted with the construction of a new building in H in the vicinity of the I Museum, the Plaintiff, who francing the steel, was on board the damaged vehicle, and the Plaintiff was on board the damaged vehicle. After examining the construction site as the Plaintiff and F, the instant accident was caused on the roads along with the military mountain waterways.

There is a fact that the plaintiff was accompanied by the damaged vehicle without compensation, but it became accompanied by the damaged vehicle due to the need of F.