1. 33,408,280 won, which was acquired by subrogation before June 23, 2016, among the application filed by the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor A for intervention in succession.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Fact 1) E is a F 45 tons truck around November 02, 201 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) around 02:40 on November 02, 201.

) A driver, while driving his/her vehicle and driving his/her road in the Hanyang-dong, the Hanyang-dong, the Hanyang-gu, the Hanyang-gu, the Hanyang-gu, the Hanyang-gu, the Hanyang-gu, the Hanyang-gu, the Hanyang-gu, the Hanyang-gu, the Hanyang-gu, the Hansan-gu, the Hansan-gu, the Hanyang-do, the Hanyang-do, the Hanyang-do, the Han-do, the Han-gu,

(i) the part left behind the left-hand side of the Defendant’s vehicle which was stopped as above while driving at the four-lanes at the above point, is the I Mti Cargo Vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “mati Vehicle”) with which the Plaintiff’s vehicle is shocked and continued to drive three-lanes.

3) The front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was the Plaintiff’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(2) Due to the instant accident, Plaintiff A suffered injury from blood transfusions, etc. under the trauma of the instant accident.

3) Plaintiff B is the wife of Plaintiff A, and Plaintiff C and D are the children of Plaintiff A, and the Defendant is the mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement on the Defendant’s vehicle. b) According to the above recognition facts, Plaintiff A was injured due to the operation of the Defendant vehicle, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiffs for the damages suffered by the Plaintiffs due to the instant accident as the mutual aid business entity of the Defendant vehicle.

2. As to this, the Defendant stated the place of the instant accident as a tunnel, and the Defendant’s driver, E, a driver of the Defendant, has stopped to the right-hand side of the four-lane, and operated an emergency, etc. to the maximum extent possible, and even if the vehicle was installed in the vicinity of the vehicle, and the latter can safely proceed, the Defendant’s vehicle driving on the three-lane route changed the vehicle to the four-lane in order to pass the vehicle ahead of the vehicle in front, but found the Defendant’s vehicle and returned to the three-lane.