beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. The following facts can be acknowledged in light of the following facts: Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 6 and the purport of the entire pleadings in video.
E On March 26, 2015, 01:01:28 U.S. car (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicle”) and conflict with U.S. driver’s Obane (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff Obane”) of U.S. F (hereinafter referred to as “the network”) that takes place in the first lane of the 302-lanes in Seoul Jung-gu, Jung-gu, Seoul.
(hereinafter “instant accident”). (b)
As a result of the instant accident, the Deceased died at a multi-drhesion dye and low-dye shock.
C. The plaintiff A is the deceased's spouse, and the rest of the plaintiffs are the deceased's children, and the defendant is the mutual aid business operator who entered into a mutual aid agreement on the defendant's vehicle
2. Determination
A. The plaintiffs asserted that E, the driver of the defendant vehicle, has the duty to rescue the deceased immediately after the accident of this case, but even after recognizing the accident of this case, the defendant suspended the defendant vehicle and proceeded again and caused the death of the deceased. Thus, the defendant asserts that the insurer of the defendant vehicle is liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the plaintiffs who are the deceased and their successors due to the accident of this case.
As to this, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case is an accident that occurred by shocking the plaintiff's Otoba as the front part of the defendant's vehicle on the wind that the deceased proceed in the opposite direction on the opposite side of the defendant's vehicle, and go beyond the Gap's own central line, and that the accident of this case occurred by the whole negligence of the deceased, so the defendant should be exempted from liability.
B. The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the descriptions of Gap evidence 3, Nos. 4, Eul evidence 1, and Nos. 2 and the purport of the entire pleadings, and in light of these facts.