(a) the recognition of liability 1) the entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 5, 7, 10, and 11 in the determination of the cause of the claim (including the number; hereinafter the same shall apply);

In full view of the witness D’s testimony, appraiser E, F, and G’s results of each appraisal, and the overall purport of the pleadings, Defendant C’s H Poter Cargo Vehicles owned by Defendant B (hereinafter “instant accident vehicle”) around October 22:30, 2012.

) The fact that the Plaintiff’s left shoulder was walking along the edge of the said road by driving the vehicle and passing through the road before the I pension in Western-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun (hereinafter referred to as the “instant traffic accident”).

(2) Defendant C, as an employee of Defendant B, is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages caused by the instant traffic accident pursuant to Article 750 of the Civil Act and Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act. Therefore, the Defendants are jointly liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages arising from the instant traffic accident pursuant to Article 750 of the Civil Act and Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, barring any special circumstance, on February 26, 2013, the place where the instant traffic accident occurred is one-lane road, which does not distinction between the roadway and the sidewalk at the time, and on February 27, 2013, the Plaintiff suffered injuries due to the instant traffic accident. According to the above recognition, Defendant C caused the Plaintiff’s negligence by shocking the Plaintiff, and Defendant B is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages arising from the instant traffic accident. Therefore, the Defendants are jointly liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages as seen below (i.e., judgment on Defendant B’s assertion).