손해배상(자)
1. The Defendant: 124,084,266 won to Plaintiff A, 122,434,266 won to Plaintiff B, and 2,00,000 won to Plaintiff C and D, respectively.
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. Fact 1) E is a F Vehicle around 20:20 on March 19, 2014 (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”).
(i) A driver is driving and driving a I (hereinafter referred to as “the network”) who, due to the negligence of entering the intersection and going to turn to the left on the right from the opposite opposite lane, while driving the H cafeteria in front of the H cafeteria G in Suwon City along the two-lanes of the two-lanes in the shape of the apartment screen from the side of the hye elementary school located in the side of the hye, the signal has been changed by yellow signal in green signals.
(A) On March 20, 2014, the deceased was receiving the front right side of his J vehicle and caused death while being receiving treatment at the Slick Hospital at the Slick University on March 20, 2014 (hereinafter “instant accident”).
(2) The Plaintiff A and B are the parents of the Deceased, and the Plaintiff C and D are the births of the Deceased, and the Defendant is the insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Defendant’s vehicle.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's entries or images, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as stated in Gap's Evidence Nos. 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)
B. According to the above findings of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable to compensate the deceased and the plaintiffs for the damages caused by the accident of this case.
C. On the other hand, according to the above evidence, the deceased's liability is limited to 55% of the deceased's liability by taking into account the deceased's negligence in calculating the amount of damages that the deceased should compensate for, as it was caused by the occurrence of the instant accident or the expansion of damages, while the defendant's liability is limited to 55% of the defendant's liability by taking into account the various circumstances shown in the arguments, such as the relationship of the above facts, etc.
In addition, the defendant alleged that the deceased did not wear the safety belt at the time of the accident of this case, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this.