1. The Defendant: KRW 133,304,467; KRW 1,300,000; KRW 700,000 for Plaintiff C, D, and E; and each of the above.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. On October 5, 2014, at around 14:30, when a person drives G vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.110% (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”), and proceeds from the intersection of the private distance from the 7th page of the Songsan-gu, Busan-gu, U.S., Songyang-si to the debrising plane at the 7th page of the village complex in the Goyang-gu, U.S., and the front part of the H vehicle of the Plaintiff B (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”) with the front part of the Defendant vehicle, which was directly controlled by the Defendant vehicle under the new subparagraph, was turned down as the front part of the Defendant vehicle (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicle”) without stopping despite the transition to the stop signal.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). The Plaintiff, who was on board the top of the steering of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident, suffered injury, such as the right angle, the inner sacrifier, and the euthanasia, and the euthanasia and the euthanasia.

Plaintiff

B is the spouse of Plaintiff A, and Plaintiff C, D, and E are the children of Plaintiff A.

The defendant is an insurer who has concluded a comprehensive automobile insurance contract with respect to the defendant vehicle.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 23 through 26 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above fact of recognition of liability, the defendant is liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiffs as the insurer of the defendant vehicle.

C. The limitation of liability 1: (a) Plaintiff B, at the time, was the driver of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, who suffered minor injuries, such as Maeman-free knee, etc., but, in light of the fact that Plaintiff A, who was the driver of the Plaintiff, suffered serious injuries, such as the right angle, knee-free knee, etc., and only the chief part of the Plaintiff’s front glass among the front glass of the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was destroyed by the instant accident, the Plaintiff A appears not to properly fasten the safety belt, and such negligence by the Plaintiff was caused by the occurrence and expansion of the damage, and thus, the Defendant’s compensation for