1. The Defendant’s KRW 53,613,074 and the Plaintiff’s 5% per annum from April 3, 2017 to March 3, 2021.

In fact, on April 3, 2017, the Plaintiff suffered injuries, such as the mixed file e-vehicles driven by the East Building D (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) on the back of the instant vehicle operated by the East Building C (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) on April 3, 2017, due to an accident that shocks the front half of the instant vehicle that the entire part of the instant vehicle was driven by the Defendant at the time of Ansan-si, the Plaintiff suffered from the injury of the instant vehicle (hereinafter “the instant accident”). The Defendant is an insurer who concluded an insurance contract with respect to the instant vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] In light of the above facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by the accident of this case caused by the violation of Eul's duty of care at the front time.

The defendant asserts that the responsibility should be mitigated because the plaintiff was accompanied by the vehicle of this case.

In a case where the 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 convenience and interest, if it is deemed that it is very unreasonable in light of the principle of good faith or the principle of equity to impose liability like a general traffic accident on the perpetrator in light of the purpose of operation, the personal relationship between the passenger and the operator, the circumstances leading up to his participation in the vehicle, and the purpose and active nature of the demand for his participation, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da35344, Nov. 14, 1997). In full view of the above facts and the purport of the whole theory of the recognition and change, the plaintiff was on board the vehicle of this case as well as on the ground that D’s funeral hall is between D’s funeral hall.

(c).