1. The Defendants: 11,311,765 won, Plaintiff B, C, D, E, F, and G respectively, and Plaintiff H 6,28,432 won, and 1,642.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The facts of recognition 1) Defendant M are as follows: (a) No. 17:33, Jun. 6, 2013; (b) Defendant M is as Defendant M’s vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

(ii) by negligence, while driving a motor vehicle and driving a two-lane of a two-lane road in front of the heading station in the New Sea (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) in front of the heading station in the direction of the Defendant’s running along the motor vehicle, while neglecting the duty of fronting the motor vehicle at a speed of about 70 km from the Jyang bank to the waterside of the stream, the driver (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) who loaded the crosswalk on the pedestrian color signal from the front side to the left side of the direction of the Defendant’s driving.

(C) Around 20:54 on the same day, the deceased died due to brain injury, etc. (hereinafter “instant accident”).

2) The Plaintiff A is the deceased’s spouse, and Plaintiff B, C, D, E, F, and G are the deceased’s children. Meanwhile, there were P other than the above Plaintiffs as the deceased’s children, but already died. Plaintiff H is the spouse of the above P, Plaintiff I, J, K, and L are the P’s children, and Defendant Eastern Fire Marine Insurance Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is the insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements and images, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as well as the whole pleadings, as Gap's evidence 1, 2, 3, 16, 17, 23, 24 (including paper numbers)

B. According to the above facts of recognition of liability, the Defendants are obligated to compensate the Plaintiffs, who are the deceased and their bereaved family members due to the instant accident.

C. The Defendants asserted the exemption of liability and the limitation of liability against the Defendants asserted that the instant accident occurred without considering the progress of the vehicle by the Deceased, and that the Defendant M, as Defendant M, could not avoid the instant accident, and thus, the Defendants should be exempted from liability.

However, according to the above evidence, although the accident of this case was done without permission by the deceased, he turned a bicycle on the road.