A. 1) The recognition of recognition 1) C is DMaz Vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”) around October 7, 2014, around 17:25, 2014

)을 운전하여 울산 울주군 E 소재 F 옆 대덕삼거리 약 250m 전 지점의 왕복 6차로인 도로의 1차로를 울산 방면에서 온산 방면으로 시속 61 내지 70km 로 진행하던 중 뒷좌석에 타고 있던 아기를 살피던 과정에서 전방주시를 태만히 하여 조향장치를 제대로 조작하지 못한 잘못으로 그대로 우측으로 굽은 도로의 중앙선을 넘어가 반대편 차로의 2차로를 시속 41 내지 50km 로 진행하던 G 1t 포터 차량의 앞을 정면으로 들이받았다. 이로 인하여 위 포터 차량의 운전자인 H가 다발성 개방성 골절 및 장기손상으로 치료받던 중 2014. 10. 8. 01:00경 저혈량성 쇽에 의한 금성 심폐 기능 정지로 사망하였다(이하 ‘이 사건 사고’라고 한다

2) Plaintiff A is the deceased’s wife, and Plaintiff B is the deceased’s heir as the deceased’s children.

3) The Defendant (Withdrawal) is an insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle, and the Defendant’s successor transferred the entire business from the Defendant on May 27, 2015, and at the same time, he/she succeeded to the rights and obligations under an insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle pursuant to Article 146(1) of the Insurance Business Act.

B. According to the above recognition of liability, the defendant successor is liable to compensate the plaintiffs, who are the successors of the deceased, for the damages suffered by the deceased due to the accident of this case.

C. If the Defendant’s successor finds that the Defendant’s vehicle entered the center line upon limitation of liability, the Deceased would immediately be bound or avoided to take necessary measures to prevent the occurrence of the accident, such as avoiding collision, and the Defendant’s successor did not perform such duty of care.