A. Based on the responsibility, A, B, and C are employees employed by the traffic machinery technology corporation on March 7, 2012 and return to the company after completing work at D on March 7, 2012, and they were on board E vehicles owned by the C Driving Technology Corporation (hereinafter “the instant accident vehicle”), and at around 20:30 on the same day, they conflict with F vehicles at the center downstreamz distance in the summer-dong, the Defendant is liable to compensate for damages caused by the instant accident under the Automobile Accident Compensation Security Act, which is the liability insurance company for the instant accident. < Amended by Act No. 11334, Mar. 1, 2012>

B. The Defendant asserts that A and B did not wear a safety level, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and that A and B neglected to perform their duty to promote safe driving as a passenger of the instant accident owned by A and B, but it cannot be said that A and B had a duty of care to urge safe driving solely on the ground that they were accompanied by the instant accident vehicle owned by the company. Thus, each of the above arguments by the Defendant is without merit.

(c) Except as otherwise provided under each of the damages damages set forth in A and B, it is identical to the statement of each damages calculation sheet in attached Forms 1 and 2 (in accordance with the headmanial calculation method that deducts interim interest at the rate of 5/12 per month, the period for the convenience of calculation shall, in principle, be calculated on a monthly basis, but less than a month shall be included on the side where the amount is less than a month, and less than a month and less than the last month shall be excluded), and it shall be rejected that the parties’ claims are not separately explained.

(1) Personal information of the fact that actual income (A) is recognized and the content of evaluation: "The amount of damages calculated".