1. The Defendant: (a) from July 14, 2012 to Plaintiff A, KRW 1,500,000, and each of them to Plaintiff B and C.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. At around 13:50 on July 14, 2012, D, driving a E-Poter truck and driving the front side of the F G located in the light view room from the luminous view room to H. On the back side of the said truck, D had an accident involving the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant accident”) going beyond the shocking side of the said truck, without discovering the Plaintiff A and going back as it is.

B. Due to the instant accident, Plaintiff A suffered injuries, such as the impairment of a diversary diversary blood transfusion, a vegetative dog, or a lag, which has an open room into the river, damage to the bed diversary diversary dives of the bed, damage to the bed diversary dives of the lower and half of the bedne, and the ple

C. Plaintiff B is the father of Plaintiff A, and Plaintiff C is the mother of Plaintiff A, and the Defendant is the insurer who entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract with respect to the said E truck.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above fact of recognition of liability for damages, the accident of this case is caused by shocking and reverse shocking the plaintiff A, who was on the rear side of the truck as he neglected to take care of the D's rear bank and left and right, and properly operated the steering direction and brake system, while he neglected to take care of it. Thus, the defendant is liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the accident of this case as the insurer of the above truck.

B. The scope of liability for damages is not separately claimed against Plaintiff A’s lost income due to the instant accident, but only the Plaintiffs’ consolation money. However, it is possible to incur lost income due to future legacy.