1. As to the Plaintiff A’s KRW 49,703,200, and KRW 3,000,000 and each of the said money, the Defendant shall start from September 28, 2012 to September 2016.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Fact 1) C is deemed D Launasi (hereinafter “Defendant”) around 06:00 on September 28, 2012, 2012.

2) On the other hand, the Defendant’s vehicle driving, and the Defendant’s vehicle driving along the four-lane road in front of the Seoul Jung-gu, Seoul, along the three-lanes of the Cheongcheon-do, the Cheongcheon-do 2 was driving along the intersection, and the Cheongcheon-do 2 did not perform the duty of care to accurately operate the front side and the front side and the front side of the road with a speed of about 60 km at a speed of about 65 km, and the Defendant’s vehicle driving by negligence, at the same time, the Plaintiff who crossed the crosswalk from the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle driving direction to the right side of the road to the right side of the road, thereby causing the injury, such as the opening of the right side of the road (hereinafter “instant accident”).

(2) Plaintiff B is the mother of Plaintiff A, and the Defendant is a mutual aid business operator who entered into an automobile mutual aid agreement with respect to the Defendant vehicle.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 8, 9 (including branch numbers if there are branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition of liability, the defendant, who is a mutual aid business operator for the defendant's vehicle, is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the accident of this case

C. The limitation of liability, however, according to the above evidence, the plaintiff Gap's clothes sent to the new wall and delayed crossing the crosswalk, which is the melting light of the four-lane road road, which is a melting light of the road, in the direction of the center line, and became a pedestrian red signal while waiting around the center line, was erroneous in crossing the remaining road without permission for pedestrian red signal. Since such error resulted in the occurrence or expansion of damages caused by the accident in this case, the defendant's liability should be taken into account in calculating the amount of damages that the defendant should compensate for, and all circumstances revealed in the argument in this case, such as the speed of the defendant's vehicle.