1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the amount ordered to be paid below is revoked.

1. On September 29, 2014, Defendant C, a member of Defendant Limited Partnership Company B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”), was a member of the DV bus service provider of the Defendant Limited Partnership Company B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) and was involved in an accident that the Plaintiff, a passenger on board the vehicle, who was in the vehicle, was faced with the vehicle due to the Plaintiff’s central loss of the center by driving the bus in a way that the bus would be considerably shaken in the course of reducing its speed when it came to the vicinity of the bus stops in Kuneung-dong, Hongdong, Sine-si, Sikkne, Kukkdong

(hereinafter “instant accident”). The Plaintiff was sent back to the emergency room of F Hospital on the day, and was diagnosed as an injury, such as scarcitys, scarcitys, tensions, and ear pains, and was hospitalized for one month until October 29, 2014.

【Ground for Recognition: Each entry of the facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 3, and Eul 1 (including paper numbers)】

2. According to the basis of liability and the foregoing facts, Defendant C neglected his duty of care to safely drive the bus of the Defendant Company so that it does not go beyond passengers in the course of operating the bus of the Defendant Company and caused the Plaintiff to do so. As such, Defendant C is a tort, and the Defendant Company is jointly and severally liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages incurred by the instant accident as an operator and the Defendant C’s employer.

However, the plaintiff also has a duty of care to maintain the balance of his/her body by making his/her hand solidly after the bus has arrived at the bus stops for his/her own safety. However, the plaintiff has a duty of care to maintain the balance of his/her body, even though he/she has been seated in the bus being driven for his/her own safety.

The plaintiff's negligence also seems to be one of the causes for the occurrence of an accident and the expansion of damages, so the defendants' responsibilities are limited to 80% in consideration of these circumstances.

3. Scope of compensation.

A. Posive damage 689,250 won (1) 38,250 won for the treatment expenses incurred by the Plaintiff at the time of discharging the F Hospital on October 29, 2014.

Furthermore, the Plaintiff’s payment on the same day and others.