손해배상(자)
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff A KRW 28,33,333, and KRW 9,333,333 to the Plaintiff B, and KRW 23,33,333 to the Plaintiff C, and each of the above amounts.
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. The facts of recognition 1) D, around 17:10 on October 17, 2016, operated the E-Stop Bus and was negligent in performing the national highway 34 lanes 2-lane 34 around the west-gu, Seoan-gu, Seoan-gu, Seoan-gu, Seoan-si, Seoan-si, in a scoppung-si, in a scoping-si, while driving the national highway, which was directed by receiving the part of the reinforcement works of the E-Stop protection fence (hereinafter referred to as “the network”).
(1) The deceased was shocked, and the deceased was destroyed by Dam cage cage and long-term damage, etc. (hereinafter “instant accident”).
2) At the time of the instant accident, the Deceased entered the Republic of Korea as a visa (F-4) in the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter “China”).
3) Plaintiff A is the deceased’s wife, Plaintiff B, and C’s offspring, and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to the instant accident bus. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds of recognition, the entries and images of evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 9, and 14 through 18, and the purport of the entire pleadings.]
B. According to the above facts of recognition, since the accident of this case occurred due to negligence that D did not perform its duty of prior settlement, the defendant is liable to compensate the deceased and the plaintiffs for the damages caused by the accident of this case.
Accordingly, the defendant asserts that the responsibility of the defendant should be limited by asserting that the accident in this case occurred because the traffic safety sign or the vehicle leading to change of the vehicle is not properly installed in the construction section where the accident in this case occurred. However, there is no evidence to prove the above facts, or there is no evidence to prove that the deceased's negligence contributed to the occurrence of the accident in this case and the expansion of the damage. Thus, the defendant'
2. Scope of damages.
A. The bus driver of the instant accident caused the instant accident that caused the deceased by negligence that did not perform his duty of care at all times, and the deceased caused the instant accident.