1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 5,021,409 for Plaintiff A and 5% per annum from October 10, 2013 to February 16, 2016; and (b) the following.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. 1) The Defendant is the Ebera crat (hereinafter “Defendant”)’s vehicle

2) On October 18, 2013, around 18:00 on October 18, 2013, F opened a door door to the driver’s seat to stop the Defendant’s vehicle and to get off the vehicle on the side, on which there is no distinction between the vehicular road located in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G, but it conflicts with the open door that the Plaintiff was getting on and off the bicycle.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). (3) Due to the instant accident, Plaintiff A suffered from the closed frame of the body body frame of the chain frame. (4) Plaintiff B and C are the parents of Plaintiff B and C, and Plaintiff D is punished by Plaintiff A.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap's 1, 3, 4, 8, the purport of the whole pleadings]

B. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiff A due to the accident of this case as an insurer.

C. Although limitation of liability is limited, the Defendant’s liability is limited to 90% on the ground that: (a) even though the Defendant did not exercise due care for bicycles coming behind, it was erroneous in failing to pay due attention to the fact that the Plaintiff A can get off a vehicle parked on the backway of the Plaintiff A in line with the circumstances of the accident mentioned earlier; and (b) such error was the cause of the instant accident and the expansion of damage.

(10%) 2. The period for calculating the scope of liability for damages in principle 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 discount method that deducts the interim interest calculated at the rate of 5/12 per month.

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

In case of lost income: 0 won: 1) Personal information of Plaintiff A: H students and male 2) Plaintiff A claims 5% of the loss rate of labor ability due to abstract disability.

Although sex and physical assessment remain to the extent that it is minor even after reflective mix 15 cm away from the margin of the right frame.