2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. On January 26, 2014, at around 13:35, C conflicts with the Fcar driven by E (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) while driving a D Automobile (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”) and driving a D Automobile (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”) on the south side of the 615 local road on the right side at the right side of the route and driving from the right side to the right side of the route, E (hereinafter “the deceased”).

(hereinafter “instant accident”). (b)

As a result of the instant accident, the Deceased died due to the heart suspension caused by the blood shock.

C. The plaintiff A is the deceased's spouse, the plaintiff B is the deceased's children, and the defendant is the insurer who has concluded an automobile comprehensive insurance as to the defendant's vehicle.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 4 evidence, Eul 1 evidence (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The plaintiffs asserted that the accident site of this case is a structure that can see the movement of the vehicle in the opposite line, and C is proceeding without a defensive driving even though they knew in advance that there is a problem in the operation of the plaintiff vehicle, and caused the accident of this case. Thus, the defendant asserts that the deceased and the plaintiffs are liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident.

As to this, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case is an accident that occurred by shocking the front part of the defendant's vehicle on the wind that the deceased proceed in the opposite direction on the opposite side of the defendant's vehicle, and go ahead to the defendant's vehicle beyond the Gap's own central line, so the defendant's driver is not negligent, and since the accident of this case occurred by the plaintiff's total negligence, the defendant should be exempted from liability.

B. In light of the following circumstances, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiffs alone, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the purport of all the evidence as seen earlier, is sufficient to support the entirety of the arguments.