1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 55,319,532 to Plaintiff A; and (b) KRW 42,213,021 to Plaintiff B; and (c) from March 18, 2015 to October 10, 2018.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On March 18, 2015, C: (a) C is a D vehicle at the 24 Intersection-ro 18:35, Chuncheon enzym-ro (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

2) In the case of the instant accident, the Plaintiff, while driving a vehicle, neglected the duty of Jeonju and caused injury to E, by shocking E that crossed a fright road, such as frightencing and frightening, and causing injury to E (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(2) E was treated for the above injury, and died on February 24, 2018.

(hereinafter referred to as “E. 3”) Plaintiff A is the deceased’s spouse, Plaintiff B is the deceased’s child, and the Defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Defendant vehicle. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, A’s evidence Nos. 2, 4, and 5, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

B. According to the facts of recognition of liability, the defendant, the insurer of the defendant vehicle, is jointly liable for damages suffered by the deceased and the plaintiffs due to the accident of this case.

C. However, according to the above evidence, the deceased's liability is limited to 80% of the defendant's liability on the ground that the deceased's negligence is recognized as not having taken the right and the right at the time of the accident of this case and without permission, and such negligence was caused by the occurrence of the accident of this case and the expansion of damages.

(2) The scope of liability for damages shall be as follows, and in principle, the period for the convenience of calculation shall be calculated on a monthly basis, but less than the last month and less than KRW 2 shall be discarded.

The calculation of the current value at the time of the accident shall be based on the reduction rate of 5/12 percent per month to deduct the interim interest.

In addition, it is rejected that the parties' arguments are not stated separately.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 4, 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

A. The Plaintiffs are the total amount of 68,594, which corresponds to the urban daily wage of ordinary workers from the time of the instant accident to March 17, 2017.