A. As to D vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff-2”), Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) is an insurer who has concluded respective automobile insurance with respect to the vehicle E (hereinafter “Defendant 1”), and Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”) is an insurer who has concluded each automobile insurance with respect to the vehicle F (hereinafter “Defendant 2”).

나. 원고 차량은 2016. 12. 18. 18:15경 경남 하동군 금남면 대치리 88-8 소재 편도 2차로 중 1차로를 진행하던 중 보행 중인 G(이하 ‘망인’이라 한다)을 충격하여 망인은 약 41m 정도 튕겨나가 1차로 상에 쓰러졌고(이하 ‘제1차 사고’라고 한다), 원고 차량 후미에서 진행하던 피고1 차량이 제1차 사고로부터 약 7초 후에 망인을 발견하지 못하고 역과하였으며(이하 ‘제2차 사고’라고 한다), 그 후 피고1 차량 뒤에서 진행하던 피고2 차량 역시 위 망인을 발견하지 못하고 역과하였다

(hereinafter “Third Accident”). The Deceased died at the site.

C. On May 12, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 66,340,00 (i.e., funeral expenses of KRW 94,772,184 (i.e., funeral expenses of KRW 45,00,000, KRW 46,772,184) x 70%, and below KRW 1,000) as insurance money.

The prosecutor of the Dong District Office of Busan District Prosecutors' Office made all dispositions against the drivers of the defendant 1 and 2 on the charge of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Death).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 6, Eul evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 through 6 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings and the arguments

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s death of the Deceased was caused by the concurrence between the negligence of the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant 1 and 2’s vehicle. Since the negligence ratio of Defendant 1 and 2’s vehicle is 2/3, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff.