1. As to Plaintiff A’s KRW 16,00,00, and KRW 9,00,000 to Plaintiff B, and each of the said money, the Defendant shall start January 5, 2015 to 200.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The facts of recognition 1) C is a D bus around January 5, 2015 (hereinafter “Defendant bus”) at around 21:38, 2015.

) A driver driven a two-lane road in front of a three-lane intersection at the entrance of a white apartment as the funeral in Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, along the same direction as Kimpo-section, from the Yak-dong room to the same Kimpo-section. At the time the mad E is the Fsi (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff-si”).

2) The Defendant bus driven the Defendant bus and proceeded along the same direction as Defendant bus prior to the operation of the Defendant bus, and moved to the front side of the white apartment room. Defendant bus did not avoid the Plaintiff taxi in front of the left side and was shocked with the front side part of the Plaintiff taxi in front of the left side. As a result, Plaintiff taxi shocked the front side of the Plaintiff taxi in front of the opposite direction (hereinafter “instant accident”).

A) On January 6, 2015, E died (hereinafter “E”) due to the instant accident.

2) Plaintiff A is the deceased’s spouse, and Plaintiff B is the deceased’s child, and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that has concluded a mutual aid agreement with respect to Defendant bus.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 3-5 evidence, Eul 1, 2 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. 1) According to the above facts, the deceased died due to the operation of the Defendant bus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is liable to compensate the damages suffered by the plaintiffs, who are the deceased and their bereaved family members, as mutual aid business operators of the Defendant bus. 2) The Defendant asserts that the instant accident occurred due to the gross negligence of the deceased, who violated the traffic method at the intersection while driving in the first lane, and who made a bypassing as a driver of the Defendant bus, and that the instant accident occurred due to the negligence of the deceased, who carried out a bypassing as a bypassing as a driver of the Defendant bus, and thus, the Plaintiff taxi should be exempted from liability due to no duty to pay due attention even if it was anticipated that the Plaintiff

In general, one’s own.