손해배상(산)
1. As to Defendant D and F’s co-ownership of KRW 9,656,125 to Plaintiff A, and KRW 44,275,339 to Plaintiff B and each of the said money.
1. Indemnity and occurrence of liability for the payment of insurance proceeds;
A. 1) On December 22, 2012, Plaintiff A is a low-priced vehicle G (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) around 21:40 on December 22, 2012.
(B) At the time of Yangsan-do, the Defendant E was driving a vehicle with low H (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant vehicle”) and was going to go to the intersection without signal lights, etc. on the 9-o-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri.
) The driver, while entering the above intersection from the right side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, has reduced the speed or shocked the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle to enter the above intersection without properly examining the left and right side of the vehicle, and caused the Plaintiff’s injury to the Plaintiff’s driver, who was on the part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, in need of approximately 6 weeks of treatment, such as a light-string signboard escape certificate, and the Plaintiff’s injury to the Plaintiff Company, who was on the part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, such as an open room around the snow (hereinafter “instant accident”).
2) Meanwhile, Defendant F is the owner of the Defendant vehicle, and Defendant F is the company that entered into a liability insurance contract with Defendant F regarding the Defendant vehicle under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2-10 evidence, the whole purport of the pleading
B. According to the facts found as above, Defendant D is the driver of the Defendant vehicle, and Defendant F is liable for the damages suffered by the Plaintiffs as the operator of the Defendant vehicle, and Defendant B is liable for the damages suffered by the Plaintiffs within the scope of the liability insurance limit, jointly with Defendant D and F, as the liability insurer of the Defendant vehicle.
As to this, the Defendants asserted that the responsibility of the Defendants should be limited inasmuch as the Defendants were negligent in the Plaintiff A’s driving or the Plaintiff B did not wear a safety level, and thus, the Defendants’ liability should be limited. However, the following circumstances recognized by the evidence as follows, the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s road on the two-lane road, and the Defendant’s vehicle cross-section on the road on the one-lane road.