The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 116,165,78 won and its related 5% per annum from August 11, 2014 to January 12, 2021, and from the next day.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 11, 2014, C driven a D Freight 13:40 D (hereinafter “instant Cargo ”) and caused an accident that shocks the right side of the road (hereinafter “instant accident”) during the course of driving in parallel in the direction of the horizontal direction at the right side of the Hyeong-gun, Gyeonggi-do, the right side of the instant truck.

B. In the instant accident, the Plaintiff suffered damage to the upper right part and the upper part of the aggregate and the upper part of the upper part of the body, the upper part of the body, the upper part of the body, the lower part of the body, the lower part of the body, the lower part of the body, the lower part of the body, the lower part of the body, and the lower part of the body.

(c)

The Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement with E Co., Ltd. as the truck owner of the instant cargo.

【Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy Facts; Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5; Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 6; the purport of the whole pleadings】

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiff who was injured by the accident of this case pursuant to Articles 3 and 10 of the Guarantee of Automobile Damage Compensation Act and Article 724 (2) of the Commercial Act.

B. The defendant asserts that C provided a son with a fluor for the plaintiff's convenience and interest without any consideration, and the plaintiff as the fluor C had a net quantity of the fluor, and because he neglected his duty to urge C to pay attention as to the operation of the fluor, his responsibility should be mitigated depending on the violation of the duty to urge the fluor and the safety driving.

If a driver of a vehicle permits a passenger to board the vehicle for the convenience and interest of the passenger without any consideration, and the passenger receives such a provision for his/her convenience and interest, taking into account various circumstances, such as the purpose of operation, the personal relationship between the passenger and the operator, the background leading up to his/her being accompanied by the vehicle, in particular, the purpose and active nature of the request for the accompanying, etc., it is deemed very unreasonable in light of the good faith principle or the principle of equity.