1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 175,116,453 with respect to the Plaintiff, and 5% per annum from June 11, 2016 to April 17, 2020.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The facts of recognition 1) Defendant C did not obtain a construction machinery operator’s license on June 11, 2016, around 07:25, and Defendant C is the Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”) in India with the width of eight meters in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D.

(B) the E in the possession of the vehicle (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicle”);

) While driving a cement and transporting cement, the Plaintiff’s bridge walked along the mast to the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”) was shocked with the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle.

2) The Plaintiff got off the left knee and cut off the left knee and the left knee, due to the instant accident.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 6, 9 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above recognition and scope of liability, the Plaintiff was injured due to the operation of the Defendant vehicle, and barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable as the operator of the Defendant vehicle to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages caused by the instant accident.

C. The Defendants’ determination as to the limitation of liability asserts that the Defendants neglected to ensure their own safety by taking into account the moving path of the Defendant vehicle after the movement of the vehicle, or by safely walking out of the working group’s safety, and thus, the Defendants’ fault should be taken into account in calculating the amount of damages that the Defendants should compensate for, inasmuch as the Defendants neglected to take into account, the Plaintiff’s fault in calculating the amount of damages.

However, as recognized by the above facts and the evidence revealed earlier, the accident of this case occurred in the course of India, and the defendant.