1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant NonNNFFF damage insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant 2”) concluded each comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to D ABWW car (hereinafter “Defendant 2”), and Defendant Samsung Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant 1”) concluded each comprehensive motor vehicle insurance contract with respect to E BW car (hereinafter “Defendant 1”).

B. On June 5, 2013, at around 01:08, F driven Defendant 2’s vehicle, and left to the left of the road at the speed of 60 km/h in front of the H cafeteria in G at the time of the course of the course of the operation of the road at the speed of 50 km from the park, regardless of its bad faith, and, at the right right side of the direction of the course of the course of the operation of the road, I was received from Defendant 2’s front portion of the vehicle.

(hereinafter “the instant primary accident”). The F escaped without taking relief measures, and the J, followed by the driving of Defendant 1, while under the influence of 0.134% alcohol level, Defendant 1 was under the influence of alcohol level 0.10%, and the said road was driven at the speed of 31 to 40km/h, and the said I was under the influence of Defendant 1’s operation with approximately 40 meters on Defendant 1’s vehicle.

(hereinafter “instant secondary accident”). C.

Due to the instant accident, I died.

(hereinafter referred to as "the deceased" means facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 5, 12, 13, 19, 31, Eul evidence Nos. 10, 15 through 21, and the purport of the whole pleadings)

2. Judgment on the parties’ assertion

A. The plaintiffs' assertion (the first deceased died without marriage, and both his/her father and mother were dead before the death of the deceased, and only the plaintiffs who were his/her heir was the deceased, but after K changed his/her assertion that he/she was the heir as the biological mother, and then K changed his/her claim that he/she was the heir as the biological mother) caused mental damage to the plaintiffs who are pro-friendly relatives. Therefore,

B. Defendant 1’s assertion deceased due to the shock of Defendant 1’s vehicle

It is difficult to deem that there is negligence on the part of the driver of the Defendant 1 vehicle.

The Plaintiffs are the Plaintiffs.