A. 1) On April 11, 2015, C: (a) around 22:35, 2015, C is a D vehicle on the two-lanes of the Pyeongtaek-si Highway (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

2) The instant accident was found to have been caused by his neglect of the duty of the front-time watch while driving the vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(2) The Plaintiff was on the top of the steering of the foregoing E vehicle, and suffered an injury, such as the degradation, etc., due to the instant accident.

3) The Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement on the Defendant’s vehicle. According to the fact of recognition of liability, the Plaintiff was injured due to the operation of the Defendant’s vehicle, barring any special circumstance, and thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate for the Plaintiff’s damage caused by the instant accident as a mutual aid business entity for the Defendant’s vehicle. (c) The Defendant asserts that the Defendant’s liability should be limited since the Plaintiff did not wear the safety belt at the time of the instant accident. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s non-use of the safety belt, and the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

2. The scope of liability for damages shall be as follows, and in principle, the period for the convenience of calculation shall be calculated on a monthly basis, but less than the last month and less than KRW 1 shall be discarded:

The calculation of the current value at the time of the accident shall be based on the reduction rate of 5/12 percent per month to deduct the interim interest.

In addition, it is rejected that the parties' arguments are not stated separately.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2, 7, result of a physical appraisal commission to the head of F Hospital, significant facts, experience, and purport of the whole pleadings

A. Personal Information 1) Personal Information: Girs women, income and operation period ( March 31, 2059), the Plaintiff’s report on the actual working conditions by employment type in 2016. The Plaintiff’s wage, working hours, and working hours of the industry (e.g., during the middle, continuous, gender, and gender).