A. At around 12:30 on September 29, 2016, G driving a vehicle of Hyang-dong H (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) and turn to the left in the direction of the seat of the Cheongnam-do from the direction of the Cheongyang-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, the front road of the “J” located in the Cheongyang-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

There are three-distance crossings where traffic is not controlled. G is driving a bicycle (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff bicycle”) as it is without yield the course to the straight-line vehicle, and it shocked the network K (hereinafter referred to as “the network”) in front of the Defendant vehicle’s driver’s seat in the direction of the Cheongnam-do, Cheongnam-do. Accordingly, on October 19, 2016, K died due to pressure between brain and cerebral side, cerebral side, etc., around 19:25.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). (b)

The plaintiffs are co-inheritors of the deceased, and the defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has concluded a mutual aid agreement on the instant vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. According to the facts of recognition of the above liability, since the deceased died due to the operation of the defendant vehicle, the defendant is liable to compensate the deceased and the plaintiffs for the damages caused by the accident in this case as the mutual aid business operator of the defendant vehicle.

B. In light of the above recognition of liability limitation and the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the accident of this case is a road where the defendant's vehicle entered the lane at a straight-distance intersection where the traffic control is not performed, and the negligence and the deceased's failure to take the front-time care of the plaintiff bicycle without looking at the right side while entering the intersection, and without giving the right course for the plaintiff's bicycle, the accident of this case occurred. The road where the plaintiff's bicycle entered the intersection is a round-down secondary road with the central line marked at 5.7m wide, and the road where the defendant's vehicle entered the intersection is no central line at 4.8m wide.