1. The defendant shall be 11,425,796 won to the Appointor C, 774,716 won to the Appointor D, and the plaintiff (Appointed Party) A and the Appointor E.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On February 4, 2017, the Plaintiff C driving FOba on February 4, 2017, and straighting in violation of the FOba in the vicinity of Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from H apartment to I apartment, the Plaintiff C is a K-driving vehicle of J driving, the left left and right-hand from the right-hand side of the apartment-type factory, and the right-hand turn-hand and Uton-only exclusive road, with the right-hand turn-hand and the right-hand turn-hand signal (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

) The collision with the other (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

2) In the instant accident, the Plaintiff C suffered injury, such as the right-hand pelpel and the non-alley pellet, etc.

3) Plaintiff D, A, and E are the spouse and children of Plaintiff C, and the Defendant is the insurer that entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the Defendant’s vehicle. [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Party A’s 1, 3, and 4, and Party B’s evidence 3 (including paper numbers, and the purport of the entire pleadings)

B. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, the Defendant is liable for compensating the Plaintiffs for damages caused by the instant accident, as the Plaintiff C sustained an injury due to the operation of the Defendant’s vehicle, barring special circumstances.

For this reason, the defendant asserts that the driver of a vehicle driving along an intersection where signal lights are installed is not obliged to observe traffic regulations and to take appropriate measures to avoid collision, barring special circumstances, and that the defendant is not liable for damages to the defendant since there is no negligence on the part of the driver of the defendant vehicle driving in accordance with the new subparagraph, and since the accident of this case occurred due to the negligence of the plaintiff C, who was directly in violation of the signal, because there is no obligation to take special measures to prevent the occurrence of the accident in advance, as other vehicles are believed to violate traffic regulations and to take appropriate measures to avoid collisions.

However, the driver of the defendant vehicle shall turn to the left.