손해배상(자)
1. The Defendant: 111,173,470 won to Plaintiff A; 4,00,000 won to Plaintiff B; and 2,000,000,000 won to Plaintiff C, D, and E, respectively.
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. Facts of recognition 1) Nonparty F is a passenger car in G Coon around 16:45 on June 27, 2012 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”). Nonparty F is the Defendant vehicle.
) A driver had driven his vehicle to turn to the left on the side of the Southern-gu Busan Southern-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong road, and even if he had a duty of care to safely drive the vehicle by complying with the signal as a place where the left-hand turn is prohibited, the Defendant vehicle has violated the signal and has a duty of care to turn to the left, and is driving by the Plaintiff A (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff vehicle”) on the left-hand side of the running direction.
(2) The Defendant is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with F in relation to the Defendant’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle. The Defendant is the insurer who received the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle as the part of the front part.
3) Plaintiff B’s mother, Plaintiff C, D, and E are children of Plaintiff A. [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Plaintiff B’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and Plaintiff B’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 1, 2, and 3 (including serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply).
each entry, the purport of the whole pleading
B. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, F, the driver of the Defendant vehicle, caused the instant accident by negligence and thereby injured the Plaintiff A, thus, is liable for compensating for the damages suffered by the Plaintiffs, and the Defendant, as the insurer of the Defendant vehicle, is liable for compensating for the damages suffered by the Plaintiffs together with F.
(2) The defendant argues that the plaintiff A's negligence in the occurrence of the traffic accident in this case overlaps with that of the plaintiff A's front-time negligence, and thus, it should offset the negligence. However, the traffic accident in this case occurred due to the F's mistake while the traffic accident in this case occurred due to the Gap's own left-hand side, and it cannot be deemed that the occurrence of the traffic accident in this case and the expansion of the damage are involved in the plaintiff A's negligence. Accordingly, the defendant's above assertion is rejected).