beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 15,310,266 for Plaintiff A, B, and C; and (b) KRW 9,418,684 for Plaintiff D; and (c) KRW 7,945,789 for Plaintiff E and F, respectively.
Reasons
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
A. The facts of recognition (1) around 18:55 on July 1, 2014, G driving a H vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”) and driving a 68 local highway located in the size of 68 square meters outside the Do-gun, Do-gun, Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, in the area of a Gun-In-Ground, the Gun-In-Ground-In-Ground-In-gun, the left side part of the deceased I driver’s Do-in Do-In-Ground, which was driving from the upper right side of the running direction to the outside three sides of the road, was received as the front part of the Defendant vehicle, and the deceased died on the spot due to a divers of the instant accident, etc.
(2) The plaintiff A, B, and C is the deceased's children, and the plaintiff D, E, and F are the deceased's spouse and children, who are the deceased's children, and the defendant is the insurer who has entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the defendant's vehicle.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7 through 11 (including each number), Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiffs who are the deceased and their bereaved family members due to the accident of this case as the insurer of the defendant vehicle.
C. However, according to the above evidence, the deceased was found to have entered the above local road from the farm road bypassing the vehicle in accordance with the direction of the vehicle line. However, even though the deceased did not have entered the road bypassing it, it is unreasonable to have entered the village to the opposite village. Such errors by the deceased were caused by the accident of this case.
Therefore, the deceased's negligence should be taken into account. Meanwhile, the driver of the defendant's vehicle was proceeding more than about 22 km of speed limit, prior to the point of accident, there was an intersection, and there was a village entrance at the opposite part, and it was a road bend from the direction of the defendant's vehicle.