1. The Defendant’s KRW 35,162,963 as well as 5% per annum from August 22, 2013 to November 11, 2014 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who concluded an automobile insurance contract with the insurance period from May 28, 2013 to May 28, 2014 for B truck owned by A (hereinafter “instant truck”), and the Defendant is the owner of C Driving D bus (hereinafter “instant bus”).

B. On June 21, 2013, at around 15:25, C driven the instant bus and died after getting back the instant bus, without avoiding the instant bus, while driving the instant bus on the second line of the said road, at a stop where one passenger should get off, while driving the first bus in the direction of three-way distance, from among the two-lanes of the 60-lanes of the Gro-gun Special Metropolitan City (Seoul), at the same time, a stop was required to stop. On the second line of the said road, C changed the instant bus to the second line and stopped on the side, which is not the stop.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

On August 20, 2013, the Plaintiff, as the insurer of the instant truck, paid KRW 100 million to E with the agreed amount, and KRW 465,610, totaling KRW 100,665,610, in the name of E’s medical expenses to the Geongdong Medical Foundation on August 21, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff alleged by the parties concerned that C was responsible for compensating for damages caused by the instant accident, while the defendant claimed that C was liable for compensating for damages caused by the instant accident on the road, which is not a bus stop, on the other hand, because the instant bus stopped slowly and the instant accident occurred due to the failure to maintain the safety distance of E and the failure to perform the duty to stop on the street, although E could sufficiently avoid this accident, so the damage caused by the instant accident is not liable for compensating for the damages caused by the instant accident.

3. Determination

A. We examine the occurrence of liability for damages, the facts of recognition as seen earlier, and the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as a whole.