손해배상(자)
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 227,016,653 against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance, and its related thereto, from October 22, 2013 to May 16, 2019.
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. On October 22, 2013, F: (a) around 15:40 on October 22, 2013, F is a motor vehicle for Hlearning (hereinafter “accidentd vehicle”).
) A driver had driven a three-lane road at the entrance of the “G apartment in South-gu, South-gu, G apartment at the port of port, along the first line road from the N elementary school room, and the Plaintiff Company was driving the first motorcycle at the right side of the vehicle involved in the accident, along the second line road. The F attempted to change the course of the “G apartment” at the entrance of the “G apartment” on the said first line and make a right-hand turn over the road (hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). The Plaintiff Company operated the hand-on hand rapidly to avoid this (hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”).
(2) The Plaintiff A was determined as having suffered injury to the telecommunication paralysis, the 2nd parallel, and the 3nd degree of damage to the climatic water due to the instant accident, and was determined as having the 1st degree of disability on October 23, 2017.
3) Plaintiff B is the spouse of Plaintiff A, and Plaintiff C and D are children of Plaintiff A. 4) The Defendant is the insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with F and accident vehicle.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's entries and videos, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as well as Gap's statements and videos, evidence Nos. 1, 5 through 15, 17, 21, 25, 37, 38, 40, 41 (including each number)
(b) No driver of any motor vehicle shall change course when it is anticipated to impede normal traffic of other motor vehicles running in the direction to which he/she intends to change course of his/her motor vehicle;
At the time of the instant accident, F attempted to make a round by changing the course from the entrance of “G apartment” on the roads of the instant first line. In such a case, F verified whether the vehicle was in the direction to change its course, and neglected the duty of care to make a round by changing the course safely, while neglecting the course, and neglecting the duty of care to make a round by changing the course.