손해배상(자)
1. The defendant shall start on September 9, 2007 with respect to the plaintiff A's 127,697,646 won, the plaintiff B's 122,697,646 won, and each of the above money.
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. The facts of recognition 1) C are D vehicles around 17:30 on September 9, 2007 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicles”).
(B) In the case of G’s driving and driving the F cafeteria in the direction of the north-side branch of the vehicle office in the Yananan City in the direction of job-seeking in the direction of the job-seeking (hereinafter “instant accident”), G did not find any G coming from the right side of the vehicle in the direction of the road and did not match G’s right side part to the front right side of the Defendant vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).
2) G was killed on November 25, 2014, when receiving hospitalized treatment at a single-national university hospital, H hospital, etc., due to the instant accident, and received injury, such as satisfying, satisfying, satisfying, satisfying, satisfying, and satisfying, etc.
(hereinafter referred to as “B. G. 3”) The Plaintiffs are the deceased’s children, and the Defendant is the insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with the Defendant’s vehicle. 【The grounds for recognition.】 The fact that there is no dispute, Party A’s Nos. 1, 2, 3, 14, and 15 (including all documentary evidence attached with a serial number) and the purport of the entire pleadings.
B. According to the above recognition of liability, as the deceased died due to the operation of the Defendant vehicle, the Defendant is liable to compensate the deceased and the plaintiffs for the damages caused by the instant accident as the insurer of the Defendant vehicle, barring special circumstances.
C. The Defendant asserts that the deceased's duty of care to safely walk by checking the passage of the vehicle on the front side, avoiding the road at the time when the vehicle proceeds, etc., and thus, the deceased's negligence should be deemed to be 30% and limited to 70% of the defendant's liability. However, the accident site in this case is a road without distinction between the roadway and the sidewalk, and the deceased was walking along according to the left side of the road, and the part of the right bridge by the defendant was shocked by the road. The deceased was walking along the edge of the road.