The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is each insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with C on DNA gender vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”), and the Defendant is the one who has entered into a daily life liability insurance contract with E’s father to be the insured.

B. At around 19:20 on April 11, 2019, E was driven by a bicycle in the direction of a parking lot (hereinafter “Defendant bicycle”) within the apartment complex located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu through connections from the playground in the apartment complex, as shown in the attached Form No. 19:20 on April 11, 201, while he was driving a bicycle in the direction of the parking lot within the apartment complex (hereinafter “Defendant bicycle”), the part which was the top top of the Plaintiff’s

이로 인하여 원고 차량 운전자 C(G생), 탑승자 H(I생)은 요추 및 골반 염좌 등의 부상을 당하고, 탑승자 J(K생)는 경계(驚悸)증이 나타났다(이하 ‘이 사건 사고’라 한다). 다.

By May 29, 2019, the Plaintiff paid C KRW 931,620, H 935,850, J 543,490, totaling KRW 2,410,960, for hospital treatment expenses, agreements, etc. as listed below.

C hospital treatment costs of KRW 521,620 (including KRW 150,00), 410,00 (including KRW 150,000), 525,850 (including KRW 150,00) medical treatment costs of H hospital treatment costs of KRW 410,850 (including KRW 150,000), J hospital treatment costs of KRW 133,490 (including KRW 150,000), 2,410,960 (including KRW 150,00) in total, of the agreed amount of KRW 410,00 (including KRW 150,00) in consideration of the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition; Party A’s evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 14 (including each number); Party B’s evidence and video evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 4; and the purport of the whole oral argument.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the accident of this case is deemed to have caused the negligence of E, who failed to perform the duty of care to safely drive a bicycle as a bicycle driver by examining well, and therefore, E is liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the above C, etc. due to the accident of this case.

However, the Plaintiff is the Plaintiff’s vehicle.