1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 37,466,192 with the Plaintiff as well as the period from September 15, 2017 to November 13, 2020.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The facts of recognition 1) Defendant C’s vehicle with D A-Wed-Wed-Wed-C around September 15, 2017 (hereinafter “Defendant”) around 15:30, 2017

) While driving the vehicle and driving the vehicle, while driving the vehicle along the same lane in the front section of the Defendant’s vehicle while driving the vehicle at a point of 20 km away from the 20 km in front of the rest area of the Central Highway Seoul direction: Gmeras-AMGSS 63 car (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) of the Plaintiff’s driving that driven the same lane in the front section of the vehicle.

3) The lower part of the Defendant vehicle’s front part was shocked (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

2) The Plaintiff sustained an injury in the field of the field of the sloping base and both sides, etc. due to the instant traffic accident.

3) Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”)

The insurer is the insurer who has entered into an automobile comprehensive insurance contract against the Defendant vehicle. 【The ground for recognition, the existence of any dispute, and evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, and 15 (if any, including the number; hereinafter the same shall apply).

each entry or video, the whole purport of the pleading;

B. According to the above recognition of liability, Defendant C and Defendant C, the insurer, were injured by the operation of Defendant C’s Defendant vehicle, barring any special circumstance, are jointly and severally liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages caused by the instant accident.

C. The Defendants asserted that the liability of the Defendants should be limited since they had been negligent in an rapid operation on an expressway even on the part of the Plaintiff. However, the video of the evidence No. 15 alone is insufficient to deem that the Plaintiff was an rapid operation without any justifiable reason, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise, the Defendants’ claim on the limitation of liability is rejected.

2. In addition to the matters stated below within the scope of liability for damages, each corresponding item of the annexed damages calculation sheet shall be the same, and in principle, the period for the convenience of calculation shall be calculated on a monthly basis, but shall be calculated on a monthly basis.