1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 6,786,136; (b) KRW 3,633,814 to Plaintiff A; and (c) from December 22, 2013 to July 2016 to Plaintiff B.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. 1) The fact of recognition is that the non-party C is driving. The non-party C’s vehicle is the defendant’s vehicle

(2) On December 22, 2013, at the end of 11:40 on December 22, 2013, when the Plaintiff A, who first entered the intersection and was in the position of the Plaintiff B, was driven by the Plaintiff A, and was in the seat of the Plaintiff B (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) while he was in the direct control of the intersection at the e-vehicle located at the e-vehicle located at the e-vehicle located at the e-road.

2) The part after the driver’s seat was shocked (hereinafter “instant accident”).

2) As a result, Plaintiff A suffered from the injury of the escape symptoms, etc. of the climatic signboards, and Plaintiff B suffered from the injury of the climatic and the climatic base, etc.

3) The defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into a mutual aid agreement for the defendant's vehicle (based on recognition). The defendant is a mutual aid business operator who has entered into a mutual aid agreement for the defendant's vehicle (based on recognition), without dispute, Gap's evidence 1 to 6, Eul's evidence 1 to 5 (if available, each statement including a serial number,

B. According to the facts of recognition of liability, C, the driver of the Defendant vehicle, is liable to compensate the Plaintiffs for the damages caused by the instant accident, as it neglected his/her duty of care to reduce speed in passing through the intersection and to safely check it well, and caused the instant accident, and the Defendant is liable to compensate for the said damages together with C, as a mutual aid contractor who has entered into a mutual aid agreement with respect to the Defendant vehicle.

C. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence revealed prior to the limitation of liability, namely, the point where the instant accident occurred, are crosssections, and the vicinity of the intersection and the driving lane of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was covered by snow at the time of the instant accident, and in such circumstances, the Plaintiff’s vehicle did not take sufficient safety measures, such as the suspension in the vicinity of the intersection or the slowly driving, thereby affecting the occurrence and expansion of damage caused by the instant accident.