1. The Defendant’s KRW 5,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from December 28, 2015 to July 6, 2017.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The judgment on the cause of the claim is a person who has served in a "Dcafeteria", a restaurant operated by C.

On December 28, 2015, at around 02:15, the Defendant driven the off-road 413 new malk-ro, Eunpyeong-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government Madroba, and proceeded with the three-lanes of the west-4-lane road from the Madamba basin to the new airside, and had the Plaintiff crossing the road near the intersection to the right side from the left side of the direction of the Defendant’s proceeding with the front wheels of the Otoba.

(hereinafter “instant accident.” The Plaintiff received surgery by suffering injuries, such as an injury to the right-hand pelle pelle, etc. due to the instant accident.

At the time of the accident of this case, the defendant did not have a driver's license to drive the Oral Sea.

In addition, the intersection where the accident in this case occurred is about four-lane roads, and even though there were new walls, there were lightings to the extent that the plaintiff could cross the road on CCTV near the accident site, and there seems to have been no obstacles to obstruct the plaintiff's view.

In relation to the instant accident, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 7 million due to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

[Grounds for recognition] A. A. 1-4 evidence, and the purport of the entire pleadings are as follows: (a) the Defendant, while driving without a driver’s license, caused the instant accident by violating the duty of pre-trial care; and (b) thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the Plaintiff.

B. Notwithstanding the signal prohibiting crossing at around 02:15, the Plaintiff was crossing the vicinity of the crosswalk, not the crosswalk, in violation of the signal, and the Defendant, who was proceeding in accordance with the straight line, did not discover the Plaintiff and proceeded with it. The Plaintiff’s negligence is deemed to have a significant cause in the occurrence of the instant accident.

Furthermore, the location of the instant accident, the time of the accident, and the number of signals shall be observed.