1. The Defendant’s KRW 13,531,484 as well as its annual 5% from February 11, 2007 to July 16, 2010 to the Plaintiff.

1. On February 11, 2007, at around 00:30 on the basis of Defendant B’s basic facts, C (D) driving a front bank road located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Yeongdeungpo-gu, one of the 4 U.S., with no number plate for its ownership, and driving a front bank road at the 125cc U.S., which is located in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government, along the right side of the Plaintiff’s E driver’s vehicle, sent to the right side of the front bank line of the O.S., with the front side of the O.M., the lower part of the Plaintiff’s E driver’s vehicle, sent to the front side of the O.S., and caused the Plaintiff’s injury to brain dust, c., and the latter part of the vehicle owned by the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter referred to as "the accident of this case") / [the ground for recognition] / A 1 to 3, A 4-1, 2

2. Whether liability for damages occurred or not, although C is deemed capable of changing liability by remaining 16 years and 6 months of age at the time of the accident, where damage was incurred due to a minor's illegal act, if there is a proximate causal relation with the minor's breach of duty by the supervisor, the supervisor shall be held liable for damages as a general tort (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da15374, Mar. 28, 1997). The detailed content of the supervisor's duty of care shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the situation of the minor, such as the minor's age, character, living together between the person with parental authority and the minor, and the relationship between the person with parental authority and the minor's economic dependence on the minor.

With respect to this case, as a student, C was living together with the parent, and was under protection and supervision as a student without any special import source, and C was owned by Oralba, and therefore, C was well aware of the fact that the father, the defendant, who is the father, was well aware of Oralba. Therefore C was unable to drive without a license and instruct C to drive safe driving.