A. At around 18:50 on October 1, 2010, Defendant B driven a crenton vehicle owned by himself (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) under the influence of alcohol content of 0.171%, and caused the Plaintiff, who was on the top of the steering line of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, to inflict an injury on the Plaintiff, such as the Defendant’s left-hand string, the front part of the steering line of the Eststun Motor Vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) driven by D, which is parked in the traffic signal from the first lane to the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle, while driving from the west bank at the west bank.

B. Defendant Mtsts Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. is an insurance company that entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle.

(In fact that there is no dispute, Gap's No. 1, 2, and Eul's No. 1 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. According to the facts of recognition of the above liability, the plaintiff suffered injury due to the accident of this case that occurred while the defendant B operated the defendant's vehicle, and the defendants are jointly and severally liable for the damage suffered by the plaintiff.

B. Limit of liability: Provided, however, the Plaintiff’s error did not fasten the safety belt; and the Plaintiff’s error caused the expansion of damages due to the instant accident, which led to setting the Defendants’ liability ratio.

In addition, where damage occurs or has been expanded by competition between harmful acts and the factors of the victim, even if the factors of the victim are irrelevant to the cause of the victim, such as the risk of physical talent or disease, if it is contrary to the principle of fairness to compensate the perpetrator for the whole damage in light of the form, degree, etc. of the disease in question, the court shall set the amount of compensation and set the legal principle of comparative negligence.