1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 92,781,619; (b) KRW 6,951,225 to Plaintiff A; and (c) each of them, from January 31, 2015 to September 20, 202.

The occurrence of liability

A. Facts of recognition 1) D means a bus E at around 18:38 on January 31, 2015 (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”).

) A driver did not discover A, who was walking along the entrance of a terminal in the direction of the taxi platform from the surface of the city bus terminal located in the remote distance of the city bus terminal located in the vicinity of the front northwest-gun, the front left side of the Defendant’s vehicle without discovering A who was walking along the entrance of the terminal in the direction of the taxi platform (hereinafter “instant accident”). The left side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was the front left side of the Defendant’s left side (hereinafter “instant accident”).

2) The Plaintiff A suffered injury, such as the spawn’s spawn’s spawn’s left-hand, the left-hand spawn’s spawn’s swn’

3) Plaintiff B was omitted by Plaintiff A, and the Defendant is a mutual aid business entity that entered into a mutual aid agreement with the Defendant’s vehicle. [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, A’s evidence Nos. 1 through 9, and 11 (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply)

No. 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. The facts acknowledged prior to the recognition of liability for damages, comprehensively taking account of the aforementioned facts and the overall purport of the statement of evidence No. 1 and the argument, D entered the terminal entrance in consideration of the possibility that pedestrians walk along the terminal entrance when left the right at the terminal that is not distinguished from the sidewalk and the roadway, and caused the instant accident in violation of the duty of care to prevent the accident by putting pedestrians to walk along the terminal entrance, and thus, the Defendant, who is the mutual aid business entity of the Defendant’s vehicle, is liable to compensate for the damage suffered by the Plaintiff A due to the instant accident.

C. Restrictions on liability for damages: Provided, however, the Defendant’s liability is 80% in consideration of the fact that Plaintiff A’s negligence was an element for expanding damages caused by the instant accident while walking along a terminal entrance without distinction between the sidewalk and the roadway.