1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiffs' claims corresponding to the above revoked part are all revoked.

The plaintiffs asserted that the plaintiff is liable for damages to the plaintiff's mental retardation because the plaintiff's right-hand bridge part of the plaintiff Gap, who is going in the same direction as the above taxi, was driven in the direction of the Gangnam-gu Police Station at about 10 meters long from March 18, 2005, while he was driving a runway of about 15:30 meters wide from the front line of the Gangnam-gu Samsungnam-dong Hospital, Samsungnam-gu, Seoul, without delivery, from around 18, 2005, by neglecting his duty of care to check the conditions and safety of the course while he was living in the direction of 2 to 3 km in the direction of the large middle school in the direction of Gangnam-gu Police Station. The plaintiff was negligent in driving in his duty of care to verify the conditions and safety of the course while he was well examined in front of the above taxi.

The plaintiffs submitted Gap evidence No. 12 (a certificate - F's factual verification) in order to prove the circumstances of the above accident. According to the above evidence No. 12, since "F walked around the above accident site before the plaintiff A at the time of the above accident, "Mak" was followed by "Mak" behind the plaintiff's own company while walking around the above accident site, the right side of the plaintiff A was over the plaintiff A with a pipe on the left side of the taxi of this case, and the plaintiff A was still stopped with the front wheels of the plaintiff A's birth. Since the plaintiff A continued to have an Ampha, and the surrounding persons were deprived of the plaintiff's window of this case and deducted the plaintiff's vehicle soon after the driver's operation of the above taxi of this case, and the plaintiff A and the beneficiary of this case was aboard the plaintiff's vehicle of this case, and the plaintiff A and the beneficiary of this case was deducted.