1. The Defendant B Federation’s KRW 6,233,175 as well as 5% per annum from September 25, 2013 to November 16, 2016.

1. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B federation

A. 1) The Defendant Association (hereinafter “Defendant Association”) established the liability for damages.

E-city bus (hereinafter “instant bus”) owned by D Co., Ltd.

A mutual aid business entity that entered into an automobile mutual aid agreement with respect to the Plaintiff is a mutual aid business entity who entered into an automobile mutual aid agreement. Around 19:00 on September 25, 2013, the Plaintiff started to work at the seat of the bus in order to move the seat while the bus stops in the instant bus driven by F, and when the bus departs from the bus again, the bus was left at the center, and her centered on the wind at the center, and went off, and her body was cut off to the right end, and she got out of the door (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

A) The driver of a bus for recognition of provisional liability is obligated to protect passengers by checking whether passengers are seated or not, the state of loss, etc. when re-exploded after stopping, etc., without any dispute (based on recognition). The driver of a bus for recognition of provisional liability is obliged to protect passengers by starting the bus in a tent.

According to the above facts, F, a bus driver of the instant bus, did not confirm whether the Plaintiff, who was on the seat at the time of stopping after stopping, was seated safely at the seat during the stop, and it seems that F, a bus driver of the instant bus, violated the duty to protect passengers by starting the bus as soon as possible, raising the speed, etc.

Since the accident of this case occurred by F’s negligence, Defendant Federation is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages caused by the accident of this case as a mutual aid business operator of the bus of this case.

As to this, the defendant federation asserts that the present symptoms remaining in the plaintiff's shoulder are the aftermath of the surgery that the plaintiff received to the defendant C after the accident of this case, so the causal relationship with the above accident was severed. However, the evidence submitted by the above defendant alone is sufficient.