손해배상(자)
1. The Defendant’s KRW 19,662,654 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from April 22, 2008 to November 3, 2015.
1. On April 22, 2008, the premise B, while under the influence of alcohol of 01:11% of blood alcohol level C, was driven by 0.189%, and was driven by a male high school located in the new Dong-dong in Yansan-si, Nansan-si to the election commission office at the new apartment, caused the injury to the Plaintiff, who was on the front part of the cargo vehicle parked on the right side of the said vehicle due to negligence while neglecting the duty of operation and safety while driving from the new apartment to the office of the election commission.
(hereinafter “instant accident.” The Defendant is an insurer who entered into a liability insurance contract (I) with D with respect to the said vehicle.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 6-1 to 12, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, the above A-Wurt Vehicle B driver caused the instant accident due to negligence of neglecting his/her duty, such as the front-down, etc. Therefore, the Defendant, the liability insurer, is liable to compensate the Plaintiff, who is the victim for the damages incurred due to the instant accident within the scope of liability insurance, unless there are special circumstances.
B. The claim for damages due to a tort of the legal principle 1 as to the defense of extinctive prescription ceases to exist by prescription unless it is exercised within three years from the date the victim or his legal representative becomes aware of the damage and of the identity of the tortfeasor. Here, the damage and the identity of the tortfeasor are known to the fact that the damage was incurred and that the damage was caused by the tortfeasor's illegal act, and in ordinary cases, the degree and amount of the damage should not be specifically known, so the victim of the injury should have known of the damage when he suffered the injury. However, the damage could not be anticipated at the time of the tort due to the post