beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 132,686,52 to Plaintiff A, and KRW 7,00,000 to Plaintiff B, respectively, and KRW 1,50,000 to Plaintiff C and D.
Reasons
Basic Facts
Defendant E driven F tourist buses around 11:45 on May 18, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant-motor vehicle”), and proceeded at approximately 60 km in the speed of Si/Gun on the side of the coast of Gangwon-gu, Yangwon-gun, according to the land outlook of one-lane.
Defendant E, from the starting point to approximately 3km, was trying to change the speed from the 2rd line to the 1st line at the 2rd line at the 2km down from the starting point, was driven down as soon as the speed was changed, and the front part of Defendant E, as the front part of Defendant E’s vehicle, proceeded with the front part of the 2nd line farming gate and the cut gate of the 2nd line. The speed of the vehicle again from the starting point to the 5km so far as the speed of the vehicle was lost at a rapid speed of 5km, and the vehicle was cut down to the right side by a drainage of approximately 15 meters below the front line of the vehicle.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident.” The Plaintiff suffered injuries, such as the cage of cage cages, cages, salones, salones, and salones, salones, salones, salones, salones, and salones inside the right side, and other open heads.
Plaintiff
B is the husband of the plaintiff A, and the plaintiff C and D are the children of each plaintiff.
The National Federation of Bus Transport Business Associations (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Federation”) is a mutual aid business entity that has entered into a mutual aid agreement on the Defendant vehicle, and the Defendant Dae-ro Tourism Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Company”) is the employer of Defendant E and the owner of the Defendant vehicle.
[Reasons for Recognition] According to the above-mentioned facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4 through 17, 29, and 30 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply)'s statements, images, and the whole purport of the pleading, the defendant E is negligent in neglecting the duty of care to prevent accidents by accurately operating steering devices and brakes.