1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

[Attachment 1] The plaintiff's defendants are involved in the traffic accident stated in [Attachment 1].

1. Basic facts

A. On October 26, 2010, at around 18:28, C driven a ES520 car (hereinafter “instant car”) on the roads adjacent to a stable owned by the network B (hereinafter “the network”) located in Nam-si, Namwon-si (hereinafter “the network”). Around October 26, 2010, C driven the said road at a speed of about 60 km from the air-line surface of the air-line. The Deceased driven the road in the same direction as C at a speed of about 60km.

C was found to be late and operated by the Deceased’s driver, but the part on the right side of the horse behind the passenger car was taken as the part on the front part of the driver’s flag before the passenger car, and caused the Deceased to fall off on the ground.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). B.

In the instant accident, the Deceased suffered from injury, such as external bladropsis, less than external cerebral brain damage, detailed pressure on vertecopher, vertecopher, etc., and died on February 13, 2020, where the first instance judgment was rendered and the first instance judgment was pending.

C. The Defendants are the deceased’s inheritors, and the Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into a comprehensive automobile insurance contract for the instant passenger car.

C On April 19, 2011, due to the occurrence of the instant accident, was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment without prison labor and 2 years of suspended execution for the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (the Jeonju District Court 201Kadan12), and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 2 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the fact of recognition as above, the Plaintiff, as the insurer of the instant car, is liable for damages to the Defendants, who were the deceased’s heir, due to the operation of the instant car, died after being injured. Thus, barring special circumstances, the Plaintiff is liable to compensate the Defendants, as the insurer of the instant car.

3. Scope of liability for damages

A. The Defendants asserted that they should compensate for the deceased.