1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 5,827,945 to Plaintiff A; (b) KRW 1,152,801 to Plaintiff B; and (c) KRW 100,000 to Plaintiff C and D, respectively.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Fact-finding 1) Nonparty E is the F Vehicle around 14:20 on September 30, 2012 (hereinafter “Defendant Vehicle”).

(ii) A driving a vehicle, and entering the intersection in the Busan Seo-gu School from KT to the post-section in accordance with green signals. However, a vehicle driving on the right side from the left side of the Defendant vehicle was trying to pass the intersection by changing its proceeding signal to a red signal and passing through the intersection. (ii) The Plaintiff driving a G vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff vehicle”) and driving the said three-lane along the two-lane along the right side of the Defendant vehicle to the left side of the vehicle; and (iii) the Plaintiff is driving the said three-lane along the two-lane in accordance with signals straightened by the left side of the Defendant vehicle;

The collision with the defendant's vehicle that has not gone out of the intersection, and as a result, the plaintiff A and the plaintiff's vehicle together suffered injury, such as salted cat of the catus.

(hereinafter “instant accident”) Plaintiff A and B are the parents of Plaintiff C and D, and the Defendant is the insurer who has agreed to compensate for the damage caused by an accident that occurred in the course of the operation of Defendant vehicle. [In the case of Plaintiff A, 2, and 8 based on recognition, each entry of evidence No. 1, 2-1, 2, and 8, and the result of the commission of document delivery to the head of Busan District Prosecutors’ Office, the purport of the entire pleadings

B. The occurrence of liability for damages and the limitation E entered the intersection as it is, even though the vehicle was at the front of the intersection, thereby obstructing the passage of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, and resulting in the instant accident.

Therefore, the defendant is liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the accident of this case.

However, the plaintiff A was changed to the ongoing signal.

Even if it is necessary to safely proceed with the Defendant’s vehicle that is proceeding in accordance with the front line’s new line, the Defendant is negligent in entering the intersection at a somewhat high speed and causing the instant accident, taking into account the fact that Plaintiff A and Plaintiff B are married.