beta
Text
1. The Defendants’ respective Plaintiff are KRW 93,164,565 per annum from July 16, 2014 to August 27, 2014.
Reasons
1. The facts subsequent to the facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be found to have been found in view of the overall purport of the pleadings on the images of evidence Nos. 1, 3, 5 to 26, and evidence Nos. 1 to 3 (including paper numbers) and evidence Nos. 4.
The pertinent Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to B vehicles (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiffs”). The Defendant Daesan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) is the owner of Ci 40 automobiles (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) and the Defendant A’s user, and the Defendant A is the driver of the Defendant’s vehicle.
B. (1) On August 7, 2013, Defendant A driving the Defendant’s vehicle at around 10:30, and driving the vehicle into one-lane near the Janncheon Branch of the Middle River and driving the vehicle at one-lanes, and driving the vehicle at one-lanes at one-lanes in the vicinity of the Jancheon Branch of the Middle River.
Although I tried to change the two-lanes to overtake the vehicle in order to keep the vehicle ahead of it while driving at a lower speed than themselves, I also tried to change the two-lanes to the two-lanes, and it was obvious that E, the driver of the two-lanes, which is the driver of the two-lanes, will operate the vehicle more than 2-3 times, making it very difficult for E, which is a driver of the two-lanes, to drive the vehicle.
After that, the defendant vehicle and the two vehicles run ahead of or behind each other, and the defendant A thought that the two vehicles E passed by and through the hand, thereby insulting themselves, and attempted to wear two vehicles with a light to the degree that they lose their personality, and to follow the 2 vehicles with a light to the degree that they lose their personality, but they proceeded as they neglected.
Accordingly, although Defendant A was able to set up a vehicle on the side, Defendant A was able to set up a vehicle on the side, but the two vehicles started rapidly, followed by the match, and put up two vehicles again, or put up a light, but the two vehicles continue to run without complying with it.