1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning Plaintiff A is modified as follows.

Defendant 32,562,643 won to Plaintiff A.

1. Presumed factual basis

A. At around 19:20 on March 20, 2013, G: (a) driven a HH drum flusing vehicle (hereinafter “fluoring vehicle”); and (b) driven the front road located in J in G in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu along one-lanes in the direction of the distance from the transmission distance to the angle of the two-lane direction; (c) the Plaintiff (M birth) who opened the road without permission from the left side to the right side of the back side of the back side of the harming vehicle; and (d) driven the front side of the J-gu, Daegu-gu.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). (b)

Plaintiff

A was injured by the accident of this case, such as both sides and right side leaves on both sides, gymnasium, gymnasium, and establishment of a right sludge.

C. The Plaintiff B, C, D, E, and F are children of Plaintiff A, and the Defendant is an insurance company that entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with the owner G of the Literacy Vehicle.

【Facts without dispute over the grounds for recognition】 Facts, Gap’s evidence 1, 3, 4, Eul’s evidence 2-1 through 21, or the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages and limitation on liability;

A. According to the above facts, the defendant, as the insurer of a sea-going vehicle, is obligated to compensate for the damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the accident of this case.

B. However, it is reasonable to view that the fact that the Plaintiff A was crossinging the road without permission at the time of the instant accident was the same as seen earlier, and that such negligence by the Plaintiff A was the cause of the occurrence and expansion of damages arising from the instant accident.

Furthermore, the following facts or circumstances, which are acknowledged by integrating the purpose of the entire pleadings in each description or image set forth in the evidence No. 2-1 to No. 21, namely, ① the road from which the instant accident occurred, is a round-down four-way road, and a crosswalk was installed at a place less than 35.9m away from the point of unauthorized crossing of the Plaintiff A, ② the time of the instant accident occurred after the sunset (18:37) at the time of the instant accident, and it was difficult to keep the surrounding area.