1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit include the costs incurred by the supplementary participation.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs are the parents of the network D (hereinafter “the deceased”). As the deceased’s heir.

B. From October 19, 2019 to 20:30 on October 20, 2019, the Deceased-gu and No. 1 place in attached Form No. 1, 2019, after drinking alcohol at approximately one hour, and entering the exit exit No. 4 in E Station No. 3, and then, after the Defendant’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”) removed mobile phones at 2 points, which are parking lots for the Defendant’s Intervenor’s parking lot, and then died due to various prolonged damage, etc. at 3 points, the end of the platform of 1 line E Line No. 1,000, 1135, Mucheon-dong, Yongsan-do.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

At the time, the engineer of the train was taking measures such as discovering the deceased on the platform while passing through the E Station platform at a speed of about 66 km, sounding the whistle, conducting emergency control, etc., but was not prevented from the occurrence of the instant accident due to the lack of Dong-distance, and stopped around 178 meters from the place of the accident.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 7, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 24, 5, 7, 8, 9, the fact inquiry results to the chief of Seoul-gu chief of the fire station and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The summary of the plaintiffs' assertion is that the defendant, as the possessor of a structure operating a railroad, who occupies the E station and its railroad facilities in which the accident of this case occurred, and the F in the E station, has increased the outside person for business reasons, and thus, the fence should be installed at the surrounding cable so that the outside person can not access. However, the accident of this case occurred due to defects in the installation and maintenance of a structure due to defects in the installation and maintenance of the cable protection facility, and the deceased died.

Even if the Deceased was negligent in the instant accident, the Defendant cannot be exempted from the responsibility of the structure.

Therefore, the defendant applied 50% comparative negligence to the deceased's lost income of KRW 486,780,80, and funeral expenses of KRW 3 million as compensation for damages.